EN    EN EN 
 
EN 1   EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 22.10.2009 
SEC(2009) 1380 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying the 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
 
Annual Report on research and technol ogical development activities of the 
European Union in 2008 
  
{COM(2009) 558 final} 
 
EN 2   EN  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. European Support to Research : Ac tivities and Results in 2008.................................. 5 
1.1. Major policy developments in ERA............................................................................. 5 1.2. FP7 : Indirect support actions..................................................................................... 13 1.2.1. Cooperation ............................................................................................................. ... 13 
1.2.2. Ideas ................................................................................................................... ........ 28 
1.2.3. People.................................................................................................................. ....... 29 
1.2.4. Capacities .............................................................................................................. ..... 29 
1.3. FP7: Direct actions by the Joint Research Centre ...................................................... 40 1.4. Research and training actions under the EURATOM Treaty .................................... 40 1.5. Completion of previous Framewor k Programmes and other activities...................... 45 
1.6. Research programme of the Rese arch Fund for Coal and Steel................................. 47 
2. Developments in Member States a nd application of the Open Method of 
Coordination............................................................................................................... 48 
2.1. The Open Method of Coordination in support of reaching the Barcelona 
objective ..................................................................................................................... 4 8 
2.2. Trends in public and priv ate research investment...................................................... 50 
2.2.1. Progress towards the 3 % objective............................................................................ 50 2.2.2. Trends in public funding ............................................................................................ 52 2.2.3. Trends in private expenditure..................................................................................... 53 2.2.4. To sum up............................................................................................................... .... 55 
2.3. Trends in research policies......................................................................................... 55 2.3.1. Improving the policy mix for R&D............................................................................ 55 2.3.2. Responding to the crisis ............................................................................................. 56 2.3.3. Fostering structural chan ge through the development of high-tech sectors............... 57 
2.3.4. Increasing the quality of the public research base...................................................... 58 2.3.5. The ERA dimension in national policies.................................................................... 58 3. International cooperation agreements ........................................................................ 60 4. Consultation and monitoring procedures ................................................................... 60 4.1. Programme committees.............................................................................................. 61 
 
EN 3   EN 4.2. Advisory groups ......................................................................................................... 61  
4.3. European Research Area Board (ERAB) ................................................................... 62 4.4. Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 63 5. Statistical tables on th e implementation of the 7
th Framework Programme .............. 63 
5.1. Explanatory notes....................................................................................................... 63  
5.2. List of tables in the statistical annex .......................................................................... 65 Annex I: Progress achieved by the Innova tive Medicines Initative (IMI) JTI......................... 66 
I.1. imi ju first call overview ............................................................................................ 66 I.1.1. Timetable............................................................................................................... ..... 66 
I.1.2. Topics.................................................................................................................. ....... 67 
I.1.3. Budget .................................................................................................................. ...... 67 
I.2. First stage of the call: E xpression of Interest (EoI).................................................... 70 
I.2.1. Typology of applicants............................................................................................... 70 I.2.2. Country participation.................................................................................................. 7 1 
I.2.3. Evaluation results ...................................................................................................... . 75 
Annex II : Progress achieved by the ENIAC JTI ..................................................................... 77 II.1. ENIAC ju firs t call overview ..................................................................................... 77 
II.1.1. Timetable.............................................................................................................. ...... 77 
II.1.2. Topics................................................................................................................. ........ 77 
II.1.3. Budget ................................................................................................................. ....... 79 
II.2. Analysis of ENIAC Call 1.......................................................................................... 80 II.2.1. Typology of applicants............................................................................................... 80  
II.2.2. Country participation.................................................................................................. 81 
II.2.3. Evaluation results ..................................................................................................... .. 83 
Annex III : Progress achieved by the ARTEMIS JTI............................................................... 87 III.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ .... 87 
III.2. Response to the call.................................................................................................... 87 
III.3. Overview ................................................................................................................ .... 88 
III.4. Statistics for all proposals .......................................................................................... 88  
III.5. Selection ............................................................................................................... ........... 90 
III.6. Statistics for selected proposals....................................................................................... 91 
 
EN 4   EN Annex IV : Progress achieved by the Clean Sky JTI ............................................................... 93 
IV.1. Clean Sky ju first grant agreements for members ...................................................... 93 IV.1.1. Timetable.............................................................................................................. ...... 93 
IV.1.2. Clean Sky Milestones for 2008 .................................................................................. 93 IV.1.3. Integrated Technology Demonstrators (ITDs) ........................................................... 93 IV.2. Budget ................................................................................................................... ..... 95 
IV.2.1. Overall Budget ......................................................................................................... .. 95 
IV.3. Participation ............................................................................................................ . 102 
IV.3.1. Members by country................................................................................................. 102 IV.3.2. Split between industry, Un iversities and SME's ...................................................... 102 
IV.4. Calls for proposals.................................................................................................... 10 2 
 
EN 5   EN 1. E UROPEAN SUPPORT TO RESEARCH : ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS IN 2008 
1.1. Major policy developments in ERA ERA and the Lisbon strategy
 
Research lies at the heart of the Lisbon st rategy for Growth and Jobs, which aims at 
transforming the European Union (EU) into the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world. Commun ity research policy underpins European 
industrial competitiveness by strengthening the scientific and technological bases of the 
EU and its industry. It also  supports the development of  other Community policies, 
including education and innovation which to gether with research form the knowledge 
triangle. Research is particularly crucial for finding adequate responses to the global 
challenges the EU is facing, such as clim ate change, energy security and supply, 
demographic ageing, and sustainable develo pment. Community research policy and 
funding play a key role in leveraging resources and in mobilising research efforts of appropriate scale and coherence to tackle th ese challenges and respond fully to citizens' 
needs and concerns. 
The objectives of Community research polic y are encapsulated in the concept of the 
European Research Area (ERA), of which the main strategic orientations are to achieve 
excellence, to raise research efficiency a nd effectiveness, to increase the openness and 
attractiveness of Europe and the free circul ation of knowledge, and to benefit from 
international science and techno logy cooperation. Failing to i nvest more in research and 
jointly develop a world-class research system in Europe will cost future generations dearly and put our well-being at risk. Statistics on R&D investments
1, for example, 
reveal a persistent gap between the EU and the USA, as R&D investments in the EU are 
stagnating at 1.84% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), we ll behind the 2.61% level in 
the USA. Despite the stagnation in R&D inte nsity, all Member States have managed to 
increase their absolute  levels of R&D investment in re al terms since 2000. Furthermore, 
17 – including many new Member States – have  increased their R&D intensities and the 
lead that the USA has over the EU in term s of innovation has gradually decreased over 
the last five years. This means that the structural transformation of the European 
economy towards more knowledge-intensive activities is stead ily progressing and 
bearing fruits.  
Responding to the crisis  
Investing in R&D is particular ly relevant in the context of the financial and economic 
crisis, as the current economic downturn may lead  to delays or cuts in public or private 
R&D investments. The recession does, however, not call into question the main objectives and rationale for building the ERA.  On the contrary, micro-economic reforms 
and countercyclical investments in know ledge, R&D and innovation are crucial to 
mitigate the effects of the crisis, to consolidate recovery, and to ensure that European companies maintain investments in R&D in orde r to be better equipped to take advantage 
of the next economic upswing. At the same tim e, policy makers should, however, ensure 
that private R&D investment is  not crowded out and that th e distortions of competition 
                                                
 
1 See http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/pdf/key-figures-report2008-2009_en.pdf   
 
EN 6   EN through public R&D expenditure ar e kept to the minimum. The need for further reforms 
oriented towards R&D and innovation was an essential part of the economic recovery 
package, adopted by the Commission in N ovember 2008 and subse quently endorsed by 
the European Council in December 2008. In par ticular, to support and sustain industrial 
innovation, the Commission proposed the launch of three major partnerships between the 
public and private sectors in the automobile sector (the "European green cars initiative"), the construction sector (the "European ener gy-efficient buildings initiative"), and to 
increase the use of technology in manufacturing (the "Factories of th e future initiative").
2  
Improved ERA governance  
The realisation of an open, genuine and competitive ERArea depends upon the Ljubljana 
Process for improved governance of resear ch policy across the EU, launched by the 
Competitiveness Council on 30 May 2008.3  
The first output of the Ljubljana Proce ss is the ERA 2020 vision adopted by the 
Competitiveness Council on 2 December 2008.4 This vision, which is a key reference for 
identifying future actions, projects a fully-fledged ERA by 2020 in which attractive 
conditions for doing research and investing in R&D intens ive sectors in Europe are 
ensured through optimised competition, cooperation, and coordination.  
At the centre of the ERA vision is the objectiv e to attain a "fifth freedom", as endorsed 
by the European Council in March 2008.5 The fifth freedom envisages the free 
circulation of researchers, scientific knowledge and tec hnology and aims at both the 
removal of obstacles an d the creation of new incentives to stimulate such free circulation 
in Europe. It will thus help to liberate the full potential of the European research system 
by strengthening and complementing the kn owledge dimension of the four Treaty 
freedoms of free movement of people, goods, serv ices and capital. The implication is that 
those aspects of the different Community pol icies affecting research and knowledge have 
to be better exploited and brought in line wi th the overall objectiv es of R&D policy in 
Europe. 
The five Community ERA initiatives  
At a practical level, the Ljubljana Proce ss provides a framework for matching high-level 
political commitment and overall steeri ng of ERA with significant new policy 
developments via concrete joint actions and sustainable partnerships between the 
Member States, the Commission and relevant rese arch actors. In partic ular, it frames the 
five specific ERA initiatives that were launched in 2008 following the debate and stakeholder consultation on the 2007 ERA Green paper
6, i.e.: 
                                                 
2 COM(2008) 800 "A European Economic Recovery Plan". 
3 See doc. 10231/08 "Council conclusions on the launch of the Ljubljana process – towards full 
realisation of ERA of 2871th Competitiveness Council on 29-30 May 2008. 
4 See doc. 16767/08 "Conclusions sur la définition d'une "Vision 2020  pour l'Espace européen de la 
recherche" of 2910th sessi on of the Competitiveness Council on 2 December 2008. 
5 See doc. 7652/1/08 Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council of 13-14 March 
2008. 
6 COM(2007) 161 "The European Re search Area: New Perspectives". 
 
EN 7   EN • A European partnership for improved career aspects and mobility for researchers in 
Europe (including better recruitment, tr aining, employment, working conditions and 
social security) 7; 
• The management of intellectual property in  knowledge-transfer activities and a code 
of practice for universities and ot her public research organisations8; 
• Joint programming between EU Member States  of their public research programmes 
through the definition and development of  common strategic research agendas9; 
• A new legal framework to assist Member  States in establishing and funding pan-
European research infrastructures10; 
• A strategic European framework for both the Community and Member States to foster 
and facilitate coherent international science and technology cooperation activities11. 
Only by joint effort and shared responsibil ity across regional, national and European 
levels will the five specific partnership initia tives be able to play their full role in 
increasing the extent to which research  underpins European competitiveness and 
innovation. They will be implemented through dedi cated configurations of the Scientific 
and Technical Research Committee of the EU (CREST)12 and other specific groups of 
Member State representatives.  
The European partnership for researchers aims  at driving forward a number of targeted 
actions in key areas such as training and skills; open recruitment; employment and working conditions; and social  security aspects. The Competitiveness Council of 26 
September 2008 supported the proposed appr oach for strengtheni ng coordination and 
cooperation at European level and endorsed the priority lin es of actions. Portuguese 
Minister Gago and the Luxembur g Minister Biltgen were subs equently invited to come 
up with further ideas on how to implement the European Partnership for Researchers. 
The two ministers reported back on their work at the Competitiveness Council of 2 December. They will provide an update on progress made in the course of 2009. The first 
steps towards the implementation of the Pa rtnership have since been launched, in 
particular through the preparation of a rene wal of the mandate and composition of the 
Steering Group Human Resources and Mobi lity. Finally, the Commission presented a 
"Human resources Strategy for Researchers" at the end of 2008. This mechanism aims at 
supporting the implementation of the "European  Charter for Researchers and the Code 
for their Recruitment" by individual resear ch institutions, encouraging improvement of 
and better visibility for the most  favourable working environment. 
                                                
 
7 COM(2008) 317 "Better careers and more mobility: a European partnership for researchers". 
8 Commission Recommendation C(2008) 1329 on the management of intellectual property in 
knowledge transfer activ ities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research 
organisations. 
9 COM(2008) 468 "Towards Joint Programming in research: Working together to tackle common 
challenges more effectively". 
10 Commission Proposal for a Council regulation on the Community legal framework for a European 
Research Infrastructure (COM (2008) 467). 
11 COM (2008) 588 "A strategic Eu ropean Framework for Interna tional Science and Technology 
Cooperation". 
12 For more details on the activities of CREST, see http://www.consilium.europa.eu/crest   
 
EN 8   EN The ERA initiative on knowledge-transfer c oncerns a Commission recommendation on 
the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and a Code of 
Practice for universities and other public research organisati ons. A CREST working 
group was established to support and monitor the implementation of the recommendation 
by the Member States and Associated Count ries. In parallel, a Knowledge Transfer 
Forum was set up to promote the implementation of the Code of Practice and to foster the 
exchange of best practices among relevant stakeholders, such as universities, public 
research organisations, SMEs, technology tr ansfer offices and research managers 
associations. 
Scientific progress increasingl y depends on appropriate res earch infrastructures. The 
Commission's proposal for a regulation on the legal framework for European research 
infrastructures aims to provide a tailor-made legal framework to facilitate Member States’ joint establishment and operation of large-scale Europ ean research infrastructures 
such as deep sea floor observatories or bi o-medical data bases. In December 2008, the 
European Strategic Forum for Research Infrastructures (ESFRI)
13 presented an updated 
roadmap which now comprises 44 research in frastructures of Pan- European interest. 
The new "Strategic European Framework fo r international S&T C ooperation" stresses 
the importance of developing th e partnership between Member  States and the Commision 
to strengthen coordination and create synergie s in S&T cooperation with the rest of the 
world. Involving Europe's neighbours into the ERA, fostering strategic cooperation with 
key third countries and improving the framew ork conditions for cooperation will enhance 
the international dimension of the ERA. In this context, the existing 16 S&T cooperation 
agreements with third partner countries provi de a continuing platform for improving and 
coordinating research cooperation. The Strate gic European Framework was welcomed by 
the Competitiveness Council of 2 December4 who invited Member States to establish the 
"Strategic Forum for International Co-opera tion" so as to provide an appropriate 
institutional setting to deve lop the partnership approach. 
The Communication on Joint Programmi ng was adopted on 16 July. Following the 
momentum created at the Versailles Info rmal Competitiveness Council, an informal 
group of Member States gathered to develo p a common initiative in  the field of neuro-
degenerative diseases, in part icular Alzheimer ("Alzheimer initiative"). Conclusions on 
this initiative were adop ted at the Competitiveness Council of 25-26 September14. In 
December, the Competitiveness Council15 endorsed the concept and the approach 
proposed by the Commission, and listed criteria  for the selection of themes for Joint 
Programming, as well as framew ork conditions that would facilitate the implementation 
of Joint Programming. The Conclusions also called for the establishment of a High Level 
Group on Joint Programming (GPC), to select the themes. Further elaboration of the 
"Alzheimer initiative" was ensured under Fren ch leadership, leading to the endorsement 
by nine countries. 
                                                 
13 See http://cordis.europa.eu/esfri/home.html   
14 See doc. 13668/08 "Council conclusions concerning a common commitment by the Member 
States to combat neurodegenerative diseas es, particularly Alzheimer's" of 2891th session of the 
Competitiveness Council on 25 and 26 September 2008 
15 See doc. 16775/08 "Council conclusions regarding joint programming of research in Europe in 
response to grand societal challenges" of 2910th session of the Competitiveness Council on 1 and 
2 December 2008 
 
EN 9   EN Implementing FP7  
In 2008, theSeventh Framework Program me for Research and Technological 
Development (FP7), the main instrument for European research policy, entered its second 
year. In addition to implementing FP7's Sp ecific Programmes, important contributions 
were also made to other po licy areas, notably the Europ ean Strategic Energy Technology 
Plan (SET-Plan)16.  
Some 14000 proposals were received in response  to 55 calls for proposals, with more 
than 72000 applicants. Approximately 2500 propos als were retained for funding, with a 
total requested Community contri bution of some EUR 4.2 billion.  
Two executive agencies were established under FP7. The European Research Council 
Executive Agency (ERCEA)17,18 was created to implement the FP7 Specific Programme 
"Ideas". The Research Executive Agency (REA)19 was created by Commission 
Decision20 at the end of 2007. 2008 saw concerted effo rts to establish the detailed legal 
base, the physical infrastructu re, and the required human res ources, with a view to the 
agency acting autonomously by mid-2009. Th e REA will implement parts of the FP7 
Specific Programmes "Cooperation" (themes on Space and Security), "Capacities" 
(Research for the benefit of Small and Medi um Sized Enterprises) and "People" and 
provide general FP7 support services21 on proposal reception/ev aluation, management of 
appointment letters with expert evaluato rs and legal and financial validation of 
Framework Programme participants. 
In the course of 2008, the guidelines on the redr ess procedure were revised to take into 
account the experience since their adopti on in 2007. The Rules for submission of 
proposals, and the related evaluati on, selection and award procedures22 were also revised 
in relation to the ethical review procedur es, the handling of s ecurity-sensitive RTD 
actions and the evaluation scoring.  Moreover, the work programmes23 for the FP7 
Specific Programmes "Cooperation", "Ideas",  "People", "Capacities" and "Euratom" 
were updated in 2008. The coordination of th e inter-institutional relations with the 
Council, the European Parliament, the Eu ropean Economic and Social Committee and 
the Committee of Regions, as well as CREST, was ensured. 
Throughout 2008 several improvements in the support infrastructure of FP7 were 
introduced which have simplified internal procedures. This includes the first full year of operation of a central evaluation facility (Covent Garden) which hosted more than 8000 experts in 2008. Centralised s ecretarial support services impr oved the 'time to pay' for 
external evaluators. 
In addition, the Unique Registration Facility was launched in May 2008. This enabled 
legal entities to register their legal status  independently of any negotiation process and 
                                                
 
16 COM(2007) 723 "A European strategic energy technology plan (SET plan) – Towards a low 
carbon future" 
17 Commission Decision 2008/37/EC of 14 December 2007 
18 See http://erc.europa.eu   
19 See http://ec.europa.eu/research/rea   
20 Commission Decision 2008/46/EC of 14 December 2007 
21 With the exception of the Ideas Specific Programme and Euratom 
22 See ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/ fp7/docs/fp7-evrules_en.pdf   
23 For FP7 work programmes, see http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/find-doc_en.html#workprogrammes   
 
EN 10   EN provide a single, validated registry of data us ed by all of the research family of DGs. At 
the end of 2008 more than 9000 legal entities ha d been validated and these entities were 
able to use a participant identification c ode (PIC) when subse quently preparing a 
proposal or grant agreement. This will help  speed up the negotiatio n process in 2009 and 
reduce the 'time to contract'. 
The high level of usage of the Community  Research and Development Information 
Service CORDIS (16,4 million visits)24 as well as its high le vel of availability (97,8%) 
were confirmed throughout 2008. All FP7 calls for proposals were published on time. The 2008 user satisfaction survey showed a high  level of satisfaction, in particular with 
CORDIS News, FP7 pages and the email notification services. The number of 
subscriptions to the research*eu supplements
25 has doubled during 2008, demonstrating 
the interest of user s in this publication. 
The central 'research enquiry service'26 also continued to operate in support of FP7 
fielding nearly 9000 questions and replying to 93% of them within 15 days of receipt.  
The 7th Framework Programme introduced, in addition to the audit certificates on the 
financial statements which have to be s ubmitted after the costs are being incurred and 
claimed, two new types of ex-ante certificates: 
The certificate on average personnel costs (CoMAv),  mandatory  for any 
beneficiary intending to charge personnel costs based on average personnel cost 
calculations.  
The certificate on the methodology for pers onnel and indirect costs (CoM), optional  for 
any  beneficiary of multiple grants fulfilling the eligibility criteria set by the 
Commission. 
In 2007, the Commission established eligibility cr iteria in order to lim it the application of 
the CoM to those recurrent beneficiaries fo r whom the cost-benefit relation of this 
certificate would be favourable, judged on th e number of 'historic' FP6 contract 
participations. Those criteria were comple mented at the end of November 2008 with 
thresholds related to FP7 grant agreement par ticipations, in order to  allow those recurrent 
FP7 beneficiaries, who were not eligible under  the FP6-based eligibility criteria, such as 
certain beneficiaries from the new Member States, to become eligible.  
One major simplification intended by the FP7  rules for participation was the explicit 
acceptance of the use of average personne l costs as a commonly used accounting 
practice. The FP7 grant agreement further deta ils that beneficiaries may opt to declare 
average personnel costs if based on a certified methodology approved by the 
Commission and consistent with the mana gement principles and usual accounting 
practices of the beneficiary. Neither the me aning of "significant deviation" nor the 
indicators and criteria to be used to asse ss the average personnel costs methodologies are 
specified in the FP7 legal texts. It is therefore up to the Commission to establish the criteria under which average personnel cost methodologies can be approved. Striving to 
balance the demands of simplification and ensuring the legality and regularity of 
expenditure, the Commission services are occu pied with assessing se veral possibilities 
                                                
 
24 http://cordis.europa.eu   
25 http://ec.europa.eu/research /research-eu/index_en.html   
26 http://ec.europa.eu/research/index.cfm?pg=enquiries   
 
EN 11   EN for the acceptability criteria of the av erage personnel rates methodologies in full 
knowledge of the fact that th e decision on the implementation rules of these costs will 
directly impact the Commission's time-to-pay track record under FP7. 
According to the FP7 Rules for Participa tion, the Commission is responsible for the 
review of the current 60 % transitional flat ra te and must establish a new rate applicable 
for grants awarded under call s closing after 31 December 2009. The same article states 
that the new flat rate should be an approxima tion of the real indirect costs concerned but 
not lower than 40 %. The revision of the tran sitional flat rate is aimed to promote the 
shift of transitional flat rate beneficiaries (typically those who were using the additional cost model in previous FPs) towards actual cost methodologies, with a view to encourage 
the modernisation and foster sustainability of the financial management of European 
public research entities. Info rmation was collected on this issue through the network of 
Legal and Financial National Contact Points (NCPs). Despite the fact that many of the 
concerned beneficiaries, in certain cases supported by natio nal initiatives, have launched 
initiatives for the modernisation of their accounting systems, few have at this stage effectively shifted to actual costs met hodologies and only a limited number consider 
themselves in a position to do so by 2010. This  conclusion is suppor ted by the report of 
the expert group on 'Diversified funding stream s for university-based research: impact of 
external project-based research funding on fi nancial management in Universities' and 
also by earlier conclusions of the European University Association
27. The decision on the 
revised flat rate should be available in time for the 2010 FP7 work programmes. 
Joint Technology Initiatives and Article 169  
Existing instruments for cooperation within FP7 such as Article 169 initiatives and Joint 
Technology Ini tiatives (JTIs)28 were further developed in  2008. In this context, the 
Commission adopted a proposal for an Article 169 European Metrology Joint Research 
Programme (EMRP)29, and two of the Article 169 Initiatives proposed in 2007 – 
"Ambient Assisted Living" (AAL)30 and for research performing SMEs and their partners 
(EUROSTARS)31 – were co-decided by Council and Eu ropean Parliament in July 2008 
after which their implementation phase started. Following the adoption of the Regulations setting up the first four JTIs
32 in 2007, the Council adopted a fifth JTI 
Regulation on Fuel Cells and Hydrogen in 200833. All five JTIs started their operations in 
                                                 
27 "EUA Statement on FP7 Rules of Participation proposals for support rates and costs models", 30 
March 2006 
28 JTIs are public-private partnerships in industrial  research at European le vel set up under Article 
171 of the Treaty. 
29 COM(2008) 814 "Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the 
participation by the Community in a European metrology research and development programme 
undertaken by several Member States" 
30 OJ L 201, 30.7.2008, p. 49. 
31 OJ L 201, 30.7.2008, p. 58. 
32 The first four JTIs are: Innovative Medicines (supporting the development of new knowledge, 
tools and methods for new medicines, Council Regulation 2008/73/EC, http://imi.europa.eu ), 
Clean Sky (seeking to increase the competitiveness of the European aeronautics industry while 
reducing emissions and noise, Council Regulation 2008/71/EC, http://www.cleansky.eu ), 
ARTEMIS (addressing embedded computing systems, Council Regulation 2008/74/EC, 
http://www.artemis-ju.eu ) and ENIAC (targeting the very high level of miniaturisation required 
for the next generation of nanoelectronics components, Council Regulation 2008/72/EC, www.eniac.eu
). 
33 Council Regulation 2008/521/EC of 30 May 2008, http://ec.europa.eu/research/fch   
 
EN 12   EN 2008 (implementation of their research agen da, setting up their or ganisation and moving 
towards autonomy).  
Statistical information on th e 2008 activities of the JTIs set up in 2007 is included as 
Annexes to this Commission Staff Working Document. This constitutes the first reporting on progress achieved by these JTIs, as required by Ar t 11 (1) of the respective 
Council Regulations. 
Coordination of national programme s and intergovernmental initiatives
 
The ERA-NET scheme was reinforced by the launch of the ERA-NET Learning Platform 
and the NETWATCH Information System34. These initiatives provide for coherent 
implementation mechanisms and increased mutual learning, as well as information exchange within the wider ERA-NET commun ity. Their goal is to boost the knowledge 
networking among the ERA-NET community by br inging players closer together. In 
addition, 11 ERA-NET and 4 ERA-NET Plus actions were selected from the 2008 
coordinated call, meaning that a total number of 31 ERA-NET and 8 ERA-NET Plus 
actions have been launche d since the start of FP7. 
The renewed EUREKA strategy was discusse d at three NPC/HL G meetings during 
Spring 2008 culminating in its adoption at the Ministerial Conference. At this meeting, 
Ministers also agreed on the accession of  FYROM (Former Yugoslavian Republic of 
Macedonia) to EUREKA. Portugal took over as  Chair in July, focusing on generating 
EUREKA projects and on developing a EUREKA international Strategy. 
Following the final review of COST in FP6 (M onfret report), a special report on the legal 
status and governance of COST was made  during 2008 identifying several possible 
models for the future governance of COST. Also a High Level Group has been set up to 
examine the relationship of COST with  the European Science Foundation, which 
provides scientific and adminstrative suppor t to COST under FP 7. In line with the 
Monfret report a system of impact indicat ors should be defined and an impact study 
should be launched to identify the effects of  COST. This work was started in 2008 and it 
will give important information for the FP7 interim evaluation of COST in 2010.  
European Technology Platforms
 
In 2008, European Technology Platforms (ETPs)35 spearheaded the Commission's aim to 
implement different forms of large-scale public -private partnerships: they have spun off 
Joint Technology Initiatives, contributed to indu strial initiati ves in the cont ext of the SET 
Plan and helped to shape the public-private  partnerships under the European Economic 
Recovery Plan2. A number of ETPs moved beyond their research agendas by contributing 
to the Lead Markets Initiative36, the production of standards and reviews of regulatory 
frameworks. An external evaluation37 of the ETPs showed that  although partic ipants in 
                                                 
34 See http://netwatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/nw/   
35 For more information on European Technology Platforms, see http://cordis.europa.eu/technology-
platforms/   
36 For more information on the Lead Markets Initiative, see 
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/leadmarket/leadmarket.htm  
37 For more information on the evaluation, see ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/technology-
platforms/docs/evaluation-etps.pdf   
 
EN 13   EN the ETP process are satisfied, the success in join tly defining research priorities still needs 
to be matched with implementation and an  improved interaction with national policy 
makers. 
Cooperation with other policies  
Structural Funds play an important role in  supporting the regions in implementing the 
Lisbon strategy. The Community Strategic Guidelines for Cohesion Policy focus 
increasingly on the Lisbon priorities which incl ude research. An analysis of all approved 
operational programmes38 shows that almost 25% (EUR 86 billion) of the total EU 
Structural Funds 2007-2013 are foreseen for R&D and innovation39.  
1.2. FP7 : Indirect support actions 
1.2.1. Cooperation 1.2.1.1. Health 
The 7
th Framework Programme (FP7) has a budge t of EUR 6 billion for Theme 'Health' 
for the period 2007-2013 and aims to optimise the delivery of healthcare to European 
citizens. Research is focused on disease det ection, and developing diagnosis, monitoring 
tools, and improved treatment techniques and methodologies. Policy driven research 
targets domains such as patient safety, hea lth systems research, ch ild health, long-term 
are and the human resources crisis in the hea lth sector, while at international level areas 
include evidence into policy, reproductive healt h, child and maternal health and access to 
medicines. Research project funding constitu tes the lion's share of this budget. Of 902 
research proposals received following the s econd FP7 call, 172 were  retained for funding 
in 2008. Among these, OPTISTEM is undertaking clinical trials on the use of stem cell 
therapies in patients with diseases such as  muscular dystrophy or corneal degeneration. 
These first clinical trials in man have the potential to establish stem cell therapy as a 
clinical approach. Th e project PNEUMOPATH  will investigate  the antibiotic resistance 
determinants of pneumococci, an organism that causes pneumococcal infection, and will 
thus contribute to developing effective vacc ines, diagnostic and treatment. The potential 
for successful commercialization of results is enhanced by the involvement of multiple 
industrial project partners.  
Bilateral and regional dialogue with third countries for stimulating cooperation has been 
actively pursued and deepene d. A coordinated call for pro posals was launched by the 
Commission and Russia in the areas of human genomics and cardiology. Additional 
coordinated calls for proposals were also discussed between the Commission and South 
Africa, Egypt and China. An agreement was reached with the United States National 
Institutes of Health (NIH) to furthe r open up the respective funding schemes for 
collaborative grants. The International Hu man Microbiome Consortium (IHMBC) was 
launched to foster cooperation between the major EC-funded MetaHIT project (on 
correlation between human inte stinal microbiome and inflammatory bowel disease and 
obesity) and the NIH-funded the Human Microb iome Project. It is expected that the 
                                                 
38 An Operational Programme (OP) presents the pr iorities of the Member State (and/or regions) 
benefiting from the funds 
39 For further information, see http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas2007/index_en.htm   
 
EN 14   EN IHMBC will expand into a global initiative, including projects from up to 10 countries, 
with a budget of circa EUR 200 m illion within the next 5 years. 
The European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP)40 was 
established in 2003 under Article 169 of th e Treaty to accelerate the fight against 
HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in deve loping countries. In this context, the 
Commission participates in programmes unde rtaken by several Member States (MS), 
coordinating and jointly implementing their research activities. In 2008, the Commission 
approved the Progress Report of the EDCTP (2003-2008) that highlights its 
achievements of the last few years and pres ents an outlook for its future. Co-funding 
from MS has increased drama tically in the last  years and was supplemented by additional 
funds from third parties (foundations, public-p rivate partnerships and industries). 
The Innovative Medicines Joint Undertaking (IMI JU) is a partnership between the EU 
and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical  Industries and Associ ations (EFPIA). It 
aims at a significant improvement of the e fficiency and effectiveness of the drug 
development process, ultimately leading to more effective and safer innovative medicines 
for the benefit of the patients. The IMI JU supports research proj ects pooling resources 
from various stakeholders (industry, academ ia, SMEs, regulatory authorities, healthcare 
providers, patients' organisations) around key research priorities. In 2008, all bodies of 
the IMI JU were established and the recruitm ent of the Executive Director and staff was 
initiated. Operations started in 2008 with th e launch of the first call for proposals. 
1.2.1.2. Food, agriculture and fish eries, and biotechnology 
Research focus and funding in Theme 'Food, agriculture and fisheries, and 
biotechnology' in 2008 continued to address th e complex policy challenges related to the 
further development and consolidation of the European Knowledge Based Bio-Economy 
(KBBE), in the context of demographic grow th, environmental cha nge, globalisation of 
the economy, food price inflation and security , dwindling fossil fuels, food and health, 
reform of the Common Agricultural Poli cy, maritime policy and increasing of the 
competitiveness of European bio-industry.  
Intrinsic to this approach ha s been the parallel de velopment of a European Research Area 
(ERA) in the bio-economy sector. This was further enhanced  through dialogue, 
networking, and reinforced cooperation be tween Member States under the KBBE-NET, 
and the Standing Committee on Agricultur al Research (SCAR) and through the 
launching of two new ERA-NETs (animal health; agriculture research in the 
Mediterranean) as well as interactions with  the private sector through nine European 
Technology Platforms in the KBBE area. The Commission Communication "Towards a 
coherent strategy for a European Agricultural Research Agenda"41 was adopted in 
December 2008.  
Strategic international dialogues and netw orking continued in 2008 to increase the 
competitiveness of the European Bio-economy as well as to address specific problems that developing countries face in areas such as nutrition, soil fertility and trade.  
                                                
 
40 See http://www.edctp.org   
41 COM(2008)862 "Towards a coherent strategy for a European Agricultural Research Agenda" 
 
EN 15   EN In 2008, out of 449 proposals received for 2 calls, 60 proposals will be funded with a 
total Community contribution of EUR 214.7  million. All projects, of which some 
examples are highlighted below,  contribute to the strategic goals of this Theme. The call 
KBBE-3 with a total budget of EUR 188.8 million was launched in September 2008, and 
included a coordinated call with India and a call for coordinated topics on Marine and 
Maritime Sciences across the Framework Pr ogramme. A joint call on Biorefineries with 
the Themes Energy, Environment and Nanos ciences and Nanotechnologies was launched 
in November 2008.  
Some examples of the 60 selected projec ts include the QUANTOMICS initiative which 
will fully exploit animal genome sequence information by developing a series of innovative bioinformatic, molecular genetics, and visualisation tools. The project will 
contribute to the competitiveness and sustai nability of European livestock production 
including support for animal health and produc tion policy. It will have wide applications 
for all farmed species and leave a legacy  of resources for future research.  
In the field of nutrition and health, the OBELIX project will have a major impact on 
human health and consumer protection by  generating new knowledge on early life 
exposure to hormonal food contaminants and th eir potential role in obesity. The Network 
of Excellence in high-tech food processing HighTechEurope will stimulate cross-sector 
collaboration by bringing together European scientists and industrie s from the–high-tech 
(nano, bio and ICT) and traditional food processing sectors.  
In the field of biotechnology research, the SMARTCELL project seeks to engineer plants 
and plant cells to lower the cost of pr oduction of bioactive compounds, useful as 
ingredients for novel anti-cance r and anti-inflammatory medicines or insecticides. 
Moreover, the project will develop tools, wh ich can be broadly applied to other plant 
research and for production of flavourings or fragrances. In the IRENE project, which is 
co-financed by the Russian Mini stry of Sciences, a novel st rategy to expand the use of 
biocatalysts will be pursued. Researchers will  set up computer-based methods for turning 
enzymes which are known for their robust stab ility and activity in some reactions, into 
versatile biocatalysts. 
1.2.1.3. Information and communication technologies FP7 ICT call 3 closed in March 2008 and resu lted in 71 new research contracts with a 
total recommended funding of EUR 265 milli on being proposed for selection. Call 3 
included two of the seven ch allenges identified for the ICT Theme, namely cognitive 
systems, interaction, robotics and digital libra ries & content. It also included three new 
FET proactive initiatives and actions in international cooperation.  
With the completion of call 3, all FP7 challeng es have now been covered as foreseen in 
the 2007-2008 work programme. In most cases , the integration between the different 
objectives worked well and a coherent proj ect portfolio emerged. The portfolio of 
projects provides a broad cove rage of the objectives addres sed, with a mix of industry, 
research centres and higher education. 
The ICT work programme 2009-2010 was adopted by the Commission in November 
2008. ICT call 4 was launched immediately following adoption. The new work programme continues to address the ICT resear ch priorities identified for the first phase 
of FP7 with a stronger emphasis on high-risk  ICT collaborative res earch. A particular 
focus is given to three ma jor technology and socio-econom ic transformations; the ' Future 
 
EN 16   EN Internet ', 'Alternative paths to IC T components and systems ' and ' ICT for sustainable 
development '. 
Specific efforts were directed toward s defining and implementing further a 
comprehensive international co-operation stra tegy. Particular examples are the areas of 
Future Internet, supercomputing, and some  activities in Future and Emerging 
Technologies that are implementing tight resear ch links with other regions of the world, 
notably the US and Japan. Under the 3rd IC T call, seven new international cooperation 
projects with ACP and Asia n regions were launched. 
EU research projects have continued to  demonstrate their key role in feeding 
standardisation bodies. As an example, in the field of Software Radio, a dedicated 
standardisation Committee was opened under ETSI  as a spin off of  FP5-FP6 projects. 
Many other infrastructure fields (e.g. mobile  and "next generation networks") have 
benefited from research conducted under the Framework Programme. 
Throughout 2008, research activitie s contributed to the Commi ssion's policy priorities in 
the information society domain. The ICT A dvisory Group and the National ICT Directors 
Forum provided important input to policy defi nition. To support the development of the 
European Research Area (ERA), the estab lishment of a network of Living Labs was 
further developed and several events t ook place under the Slovenian and French 
Presidencies. Meetings were also organised with represen tatives from na tional funding 
agencies and leading scientists to stim ulate the setting-up of ERA-NET actions , for 
example in the field of Quantum Informa tion Processing and Communications (QIPC) 
under the FET Proactive scheme.  
In the area of Future Internet, Commission services supported the preparation of the so-
called Bled Declaration and the establishment of the "Future Internet Assembly". Three 
Communications42 addressing the ICT field provide a comprehensive strategy for ICT 
research and innovation in the EU. The stra tegy builds on successes and lessons learned 
from ICT activities in the Framework programme , from the JTIs in ICT, from AAL, and 
from support to infrastructures and future and emerging technologies.  
The Communications propose actions that combine both the supply and demand drive for innovation, public procurement of R&D as well as public-private part nerships to lead 
notably the development of the Future Intern et. They also propose concrete actions to 
stop the fragmentation of the ICT research and innovation efforts across the EU, to better 
coordinate these efforts, pool  resources when needed incl uding for the investments in 
ICT related and ICT based re search infrastructures. 
Regarding the promotion of pre-commercial pr ocurement, work has mainly consisted of 
follow-ups to the opinions of the other ins titutions, as well as of a continuation of 
awareness-raising and experience-sharing. 
1.2.1.4. Nanosciences, nanotechnologies, mate rials and new production technologies 
The promotion of industrially relevant and technologically challenging research at EU 
level will generate new knowledge with regard  to new industrial concepts, new materials, 
                                                
 
42 COM (2009) 116 "A strategy for ICT research and innovation in the EU : raising the game"; 
COM (2009) 184 "Moving the ICT frontiers – a strategy for research on future and emerging 
technologies in Europe"; COM (2009) 108 "ICT infrastructures for e-Science" 
 
EN 17   EN new products and processes, and new integr ated solutions for industry, which will 
improve Europe's competitiveness and, at the same time, respect environmental sustainability and social responsibility.  
According to its Nanotechnology Action Plan
43, the Commission continued 
implementing an integrated set of activit ies in different research programmes: 
infrastructures; people; indus trial innovation; societal issu es; safety and regulation; 
international cooperation, as well as coordination with in the Commission and the 
European Union.  
The focus of the 2008 call for proposals under  FP7 was the development of unique 
strategic resources and assets that would provide sustainabl e capabilities, coupled with 
long-term competitive advantage. Out of 1429 submitted proposals, 126 were retained for funding. A total of 104 new grant agreements were signed in 2008 following negotiation from the 2007 call. These proposals represen t a body of research effort towards a new 
European manufacturing model, with the poten tial to compete globally with the best 
available technologies and busin ess strategies. In addition, jo int calls for proposals were 
launched with the Themes 'Energy' and 'Environment'. 
Among the proposals selected, Safe@Sea scored highest in the call for SME dedicated 
R&D and innovation. The project focuses on re ducing the risk of injury and fatal 
accidents to fisherman across Europe through research on and development of advanced 
personal protective clothing and equipment. Fishing is one of the most dangerous 
professions with 24000 fatal acci dents globally per year an d 10% of fishermen suffering 
serious injuries per year. Safe@Sea endeavours to integrate expertise on protective 
materials and clothing, IC T solutions and ergonomic de sign. This should result in 
European leadership in the area of protec tive clothing and equipment manufacturing as 
well as the wide acceptance of fisherman to  actually wear the protective clothing and 
recognition by the fishing community of the co st benefit of applyi ng state of the art 
protective measures. 
In the field of nanotechnologies , the Nano II large project fo cuses on the development of 
novel approaches for the use of micro and nano-fabricated cell chips to specify and 
expend regulatory immune cells for trea ting diverse inflammatory and autoimmune 
disorders in an organ and antigen-specific manner. The proposed cell chips will be used in the area of clinical diagnosis and ther apy and are promising for the treatment of 
inflammatory and autoimmune disease, as well as for tolerance induction in organ transplantation.  
Technical workshops in the fields of materi als sciences and nanomaterials took place in 
India and in Egypt and identifie d topics of mutual interest to both countries and the EU. 
This resulted in a coordinated call for pr oposals with India. The selected project 
ATHENA addresses potential build ing blocks of future micr oelectronics and aims to 
understand the wide class of transition meta l oxides. The envisione d applications from 
this are countless, such as in magnetic memo ries, spintronic devices, and optic sensors. 
The European Union has agreed to conti nue its involvement in the Intelligent 
Manufacturing Systems (IMS) –entry into force of renewal agreement on 4 January 
2008- which brings together the USA, Japa n, Korea, Norway, Switzerland in order to 
                                                
 
43 COM(2005)243 "Nanosciences and nanotechnologies: An action plan for Europe 2005-2009" 
 
EN 18   EN boost industrial competitiven ess, solve problems facing manufacturing worldwide and 
develop advanced manufacturing technologies and systems. In the context of the future 
EU chairmanship of the scheme in May 2010, an informal IMS Industrial Advisory 
Board (IAB) has been set up to assist the EU in bringing more focus on IMS and in 
identifying strategic initiatives of  relevance to European industry. 
At a more political level, the good and effi cient networking established with industry 
(especially through the European Technolog y Platforms) and with the scientific 
community has allowed to provide quick in put for the public-private partnerships 
(Factories of the Future and Energy Effici ent Buildings) included in the European 
Economic Recovery Plan put forward by the Commission in November 2008. 
1.2.1.5. Energy Energy systems are confronted with major ch allenges at European and at global levels. 
Energy technologies are and will be crucial in the fight against the effects of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and in helping to secure the world's energy 
supply. These major challenges with which Eur ope is confronted have put energy at the 
top of the political agenda over the past years. Europe’s  potential to develop a new 
generation of decarbonised energy technologies is enormous. Research and innovation in 
energy technology are vita l to achieving this potential and make sustainable energy 
widely available to European citizens. 
In order to respond to these issues, the Eu ropean Council and the European Parliament 
endorsed in 2008 the Commi ssion Communication "A Eur opean Strategic Energy 
Technology Plan (SET-Plan) - Towards a low carbon future"
16, a comprehensive plan to 
establish a new energy research agenda for Europe. The implementation of the SET-Plan 
will focus on innovation in cutting edge Eur opean low carbon technologies to achieve the 
2020 targets44 and the 2050 vision of the Energy Policy for Europe. To steer the 
implementation of the SET-Plan, the Commi ssion established the European Community 
Steering Group for Strategic Energy Technologi es in 2008 to pave the way for Joint 
Programming.  
During the SET-Plan conference in Pari s in October 2008, the European Energy 
Research Alliance (EERA) was created. The SET-Plan European I ndustrial Initiatives 
will define roadmaps for thei r respective technologies (wind, solar, nuclear, bioenergy, 
carbon capture and storage and grid) during 200 9 which should form the basis for both 
private and public investment in low-carbon technologies. The EERA will ensure that the 
research agenda gives continuity and a st rong innovative base for the initiatives.  
Europe needs to reconsider the ways it satisfies its energy needs. In this context, 
hydrogen, as an energy carrier, and fuel cells  as efficient energy converters, play an 
increasingly important role. However, a num ber of technical and non-technical barriers 
remain to be overcome before the widespread commercial deployment of these technologies is achieved. The Fuel Cells and Hydrogen (FCH) Joint Undertaking, a 
public-private partners hip at European level was adopted  as a Council Regulation on 30 
May 2008 with the overall aim of accelerating deployment of these technologies. It will 
implement a target-oriented, integrated programme of research, technological 
                                                
 
44 Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, ensuring a 20% share of renewable energy 
sources in the EU energy mix and diminishing of the EU global primary energy use by 20% 
 
EN 19   EN development and demonstration activities, fo cusing on the most promising applications 
in stationary and portable power generatio n and transport. In  addition, technology 
validation and assessment will identify pot ential impacts of FCH technology on energy 
security and Green House Gas (GHG) emi ssions. The partnership will also undertake 
research to support development of new re gulations and standa rds for products and 
hydrogen storage and supply, which are essent ial for every new technology to assure 
safety, reliability and inter operability will be develope d. Commercial take-off should 
start between 2010 and 2020. The first FCH JTI call for proposals was published in 
October 2008 with a total indicative financ ial contribution of EUR 28.1 million. In 2008 
the Commission facilitated the establishment of HyRAMP - a partnership of European 
regions committed to advancing hydrogen and fuel cell technologies with a view to 
aligning EU, national and regional RTD actions. 
The development and demonstration of clean , efficient road vehi cle technologies and 
alternative, renewable fuels continued in 2008. This included demonstration of hydrogen  
fuelled buses, cars and special purpose vehi cles. In total around 100 vehicles will be 
demonstrated in three FP6 projects with a total investment of some EUR 105 million 
(Community contribution EUR 48 million). Notable achievements in 2008 include a 
cumulative total of more than 2.4 million km  travelled by 44 hydrogen buses in public 
service, carrying some 8 million passengers. These projects are delivering important 
findings regarding safety, vehicle perfor mance and durability, and hydrogen supply by 
on-site reforming and by pipeline and also regarding cartridge refueling for special 
purpose vehicles. 
Demonstration of bio-fuels  use in vehicles also contin ued through 2008, including an 
extensive programme comprising more than 10 000 vehicles and 140 fuelling stations in 
10 towns - with the aim of proving extensive substitution of conventional fuels with bio-
ethanol . Another project, started in 2008, is prep aring the way for extensive use of 
second generation bio-fuels  in advanced engines and hybrid  drive-trains. The costs and 
impacts of introducing biogas  on a large scale are also bei ng assessed in a demonstration 
to prove reliability as well as aspects rela ting to biogas production, storage and use in 
vehicle fleets. 
In 2008, four new calls for proposals were f unded from the Energy budget with a total 
Community contribution of EUR 64.830 milli on. For the Energy call, the EU-Russia 
coordinated call, and the call for Futu re and Emerging Tec hnologies (FET), 153 
proposals were received, 137 of which were evaluated and 19 were selected for 
negotiation. For the Energy part of the 'Na nosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and 
New Production Technologies' joint call, 6 proposals were selected for funding.  
THATEA, a project in the field of Future and Emerging Technologies, aims to advance 
the science and technology be hind the thermoacoustic ener gy conversion processes. 
Thermoacoustics is a relatively new research  field in physics comprising knowledge of 
acoustics, fluid dynamics, heat transfer , mechanical design and dynamic system 
behaviour. Thermoacoustic research can be considered as high-risk research. The 
rewards, however, could be high. Engines, re frigerators and air conditioners have been 
considered the greatest engineering achievements of the 20th century, but these machines 
also damage the environment by causing smog, emitting greenhouse gases or leaking compounds that damage the ozone layer. Th ermoacoustic technology can help to reduce 
these effects, and sometimes eliminate them. 
 
EN 20   EN SOLAR-H2 brings together 12 world-leading European laboratories to carry out 
integrated, basic research aimed at achie ving renewable hydrogen (H2) production from 
environmentally safe resources. The projec t aims to produce hydroge n using solar light 
through natural processes with microalgae and artificial photos ynthesis mimics. The 
vision is to develop novel rout es for the production of a sola r fuel, in this case H2, from 
very abundant, effectively inexhaustible reso urces, solar energy and water. The project 
integrates two frontline research topics : photobiological H2 production in living 
organisms such as mircoalgae, and artifi cial photosynthesis mimics in human-made 
systems. SOLAR-H2 was awarded following the ENERGY 2007 Call. It builds on the 
SOLAR-H Project which was funded in the co ntext of the NEST (New and Emerging 
Technologies) Programme. Both can be consider ed as precursors of  the tremendous gain 
of interest for these research areas. 
1.2.1.6. Environment (including climate change) In 2008 the European Union strengthened its in ternational leadership in fighting climate 
change. In January, the Commission made a proposal for Climate Action and Renewable 
Energy
 which legally set the binding targets to  be achieved by 2020. The results of EU 
research proved to be essentia l in assessing the f easibility of the propos al and its possible 
impacts.  
Research projects selected in  2008 addressed in particular  the adaptation to climate 
change. For example, the HighNoon project is i nvestigating effective strategies to cope 
with changing water resources due to altering monsoon rainfall patterns and the retreat of 
Himalayan glaciers in northern India, which will have a strong impact on the availability 
of water resources. The ArcRisk project is  studying the potential impact of climate 
change on pollution and the resulting hea lth risks on the Arctic population. The 
COMBINE project is integrating assessment m odels and run scenarios to contribute to 
the EU post-2012 climate policy. The IMPLICC pr oject is analysing the implications and 
risks associated with novel mitigation options. 
In Europe, forests are a crucial element not  only of landscapes but of human living 
conditions. They provide habitats for a multit ude of animal and plant species and are 
essential for biodiversity. They are also an  important resource for the regional economy 
(wood production, recreation and tourism) as we ll as part of the cu ltural and social 
heritage. The project MOTIVE evaluates the consequences of intensified competition for 
forest resources. It seeks to develop and eval uate strategies to adapt forest management 
to balance multiple objectives under changing climate and land use patterns. 
Europe is also seeking to improve energy an d resource efficiency and decrease negative 
environmental impacts. The project OPEN:E U identifies ways to transform the EU 
economy into one which respects environm ental limits while being socially and 
financially sustainable. 
Eco-innovation is an essential part of the solutions to attain a low carbon economy, as 
strongly highlighted in the European economic recovery plan. In 2008, emphasis was placed on industrial ecology and waste preventi on approaches. By concentrating on new 
technological developments, wa ste prevention strategies and adapting existing tools, the 
ZeroWin project is identifying ze ro waste business strategies in automotive, construction, 
electronics and photovoltaic indus tries. The Commission also promotes market uptake of 
greener products. This requires verificati on schemes to validate the environmental 
 
EN 21   EN performance of the technologies used to produce them. The Coordination Action 
AdvanceETV is looking at how to propose an  efficient verificati on scheme by learning 
from successful Environmental Technologies Verification systems in the rest of the 
world.  
In 2008 a major exercise of reviewing th e impacts of past EU-funded environmental 
research was undertaken. The study, carried out  by independent experts, pointed out the 
importance of EU contribution to knowledge generation and the rele vance of scientific 
outcomes, notably the contributi ons of results to the Inter governmental Panel on Climate 
Change assessments; the promotion of methodological improvements, such as 
development of methods for environmental ri sk assessment of pharmaceuticals, now used 
internationally; and the anal ysis and support to the implem entation of EU policies and 
regulations, as in the case of the Water Fr amework Directive. The study also indicated 
the need for further dissemination of resear ch results. These conclusions are already 
contributing to the formulation of  EU-funded research activities. 
More than 400 proposals were submitted in re sponse to the second Environment calls for 
proposals under FP7 and 64 were recommende d for funding, with a total budget of 
around EUR 212 million. 
1.2.1.7. Transport (including aeronautics) The transportation of people and goods in a local, regional, national, European and 
international context are essential to Europe ’s prosperity and closely linked to economic 
growth. However, ways must be found to mitigate the negative impacts and consequences of increased mobility in relati on to the environment, energy usage, safety 
and security and public hea lth. The White Paper on Tran sport “European Transport 
Policy for 2010: Time to decide”
45 and its Mid-term review46 clearly set out the 
objectives to be addressed at a pan-European level. 
The greening of transport, modal shift an d transport corridors decongestion, urban 
mobility, time efficiency, customer satisfaction,  safety and security, cost efficiency and 
competitiveness are some of the areas addr essed by the 127 proposals selected in 2008 
for which FP7 will allocate about EUR 444 m illion. With a participation of 21%, much 
higher than the 15% target, SMEs show a strong interest in EU transport research. As an 
example, the recently selected OPENAIR proj ect aims to deliver a step change in 
technology to reduce noise from aircraft operations perceived by airport neighbouring 
communities – a major challenge facing the aircraft manufacturing industry, society and the air transport industry. The BEEST project plans to  achieve a breakthrough in 
competitiveness, environmental friendliness and safety of EU-built ships. Focusing on passenger ships, ferries and mega-yachts, the results will to a large extent be applicable also to other kinds of ships. 
SESAR is a 3 phase programme (definition, development and deployment) aiming at 
modernising and harmonising air traffic mana gement (ATM) in Europe. It represents a 
technological pillar to the Single European Sky
47 legislation and will help increase 
                                                 
45 COM (2001)370 "European transport policy for 2010: Time to decide" 
46 COM (2006)314 "Keep Europe moving – Sustainable mobility for our continent – Mid-term 
review of the European Commission's Transport White Paper" 
47 See http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/single_european_sky/single_european_sky_en.htm   
 
EN 22   EN performance of Air Traffic Management (ATM) (safety, capacity, cost efficiency, 
environmental benefits). The definition phase of the progra mme was closed in May 2008 
with the release of the SESAR Master plan48 (a commonly agreed roadmap containing 
the necessary functionalities to be achieved and the necessary timeline). The programme 
is currently in the development phase, which is managed by the SESAR Joint Undertaking (JU), an innovative public-priva te partnership involving the major ATM 
stakeholders, created under Article 171 of th e Treaty and established by the Council 
regulation 219/2007
49 for period of 8 years up to 31 December 2016. The total cost of 
this phase is estimated to be EUR 2.1 billion, borne in equal parts by the Community, Eurocontrol and the ATM Industry. In Dece mber 2008 the SESAR JU was transformed
50 
from a private company body into a Commun ity body allowing obtaining substantial tax 
savings estimated at around EUR 300 million. The Work Programme of the SESAR Joint 
Undertaking was established in 200851 and the final step of  the pre-selection and 
negotiation process to select members of th e SESAR JU was launched in December 2008. 
In 2008, EUR 50 million were committed for the Joint Undertaking from the FP 7 budget in addition to EUR 200 milli on contribution from Trans European Transport Networks 
(TEN-Т) funds. The European Commission has fixed the co-financing of the running 
costs of the Joint Undertaking at a maximum of EUR 35 million. 
The "Clean Sky" Join t Technology Initiative (JTI) was officially launched in February 
and started its activities in June once the G overning Board was in place. It will increase 
the competitiveness of the European aeronaut ics industry whilst reduc ing the impact of 
air transport emissions and noi se on the environment. The “C lean Sky” JTI will deliver 
large-scale flight and ground demonstrators — an essential step for successful market 
introduction. The Commission will provide EUR 800 million in funding from FP7 to the 
JTI, and this amount will be matched in  kind by industry. Clean Sky's current 
membership includes 86 organisations from  16 countries, 54 companies, 15 research 
centres and 17 universities. The main thrust of  activities is to coordinate and align ATM-
related research activities with those of th e SESAR Joint Undertaking (Single European 
Sky - Air Traffic Management Research). As  far as FP7 is concerned, EUR 50 million 
was transferred to the Jo int Undertaking in 2008. 
The development and validation phase of  GALILEO is ongoing until 2010. A second 
experimental satellite has been launched  in April 2008. In 2008, the Work Programme 
and the Strategic Framework were also set out , as well as the framework for cooperation 
between the Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA). EUR 95 million were 
dedicated to the completion of the devel opment phase. On 1 July 2008, ESA published 
the call for tender launching the procuremen t of the Galileo full operational capability 
(FOC) in the name and on behalf of the Commission.  
The R&D activities related to GALILEO applic ations, including the management of FP7 
calls, have in 2008 been implemented by the GNSS Supervisory Authority (GSA)
52. A 
                                                 
48 The Master plan was endorsed by the Council on 30.03.2009 (Council Decision 2009/320/EC OJ 
L 95/41 of 9th of April 2009) 
49 Council Regulation (EC) 219/2007 OJ L 64/1 of 2nd March 2007 
50 Council Regulation (EC) 1361/2008 OJ  L 352/12 of 31st of December 2008 
51 The full information on the Work Programme can be found under the following link: 
http://www.sesariu.eu/public/standard page/library list.html   
52 Established by Council Regulation 2004/EC/1321, as amended by Council Regulation 
2006/EC/1942 
 
EN 23   EN first call was launched on 15th November 2007 with a bud get of EUR 40 million. As a 
result, 23 projects were selected fo r funding. A second call was launched on 5th 
December 2008 with a budget of EUR 29 million for collaborative projects and EUR 11 
million for tenders. Some of the projects financed under the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) were finalised during 2008. In  2009 it is expected to conclude all the 
activities related to the FP6 projectsin the GALILEO application field. 
Urban transport accounts for some 40% of CO
2 emissions and 70% of other road 
transport pollutants. Fulfillment of mainstream energy, environment, transport and social policies therefore requires city level actions. In 2008 the Commission launched the 
CIVITAS Plus Programme
53 with 5 collaborative projec ts and 2 support actions which 
will receive grants totalling EUR 80 million. The five projec ts will implement some 244 
mobility measures in 25 cities. These incl ude clean vehicles, promotion of public 
transport, intelligent transpor t systems, urban frei ght logistics, cycling and walking. The 
two support actions will evaluate transferabi lity of these measures to other cities and 
disseminate results throughout Europe. The CIVITAS Forum network which acts as a 
policy sounding board now comprises some  140 city members. CIVITAS is funded 
jointly from the energy and transport specific programmes. 
As a follow-up to the Commission's Green Paper “Towards a future Maritime Policy for 
the Union”54, the Commission adopted on 3 September 2008 a Communication on a 
Maritime Research Strategy55. This new strategy is based on two main lines of action: 
enhancing the integration betw een research, infrastructure , industry and policy makers; 
and proposing forms of governance gathering a ll stakeholders. The st rategy will benefit 
not only European society as a whole, but  also science and technology providers, 
enhancing synergies, dissemination of av ailable knowledge as well as identifying 
scientific gaps. 
The Green Cars Initiative, part of the Eur opean Economic Recovery Plan, is a public 
private partnership, involving re search on a broad range of technologies and smart energy 
infrastructures essential to achieve a br eakthrough in the use of renewable and non-
polluting energy source, safety and traffic flui dity. The estimated financial envelope of 
the initiative is EUR 1 billion.  
International cooperation has also been rein forced by a significant increase of proposals 
from Russia and China. European Union and Russian officials met several times, in view to preparing a coordinated call on coopera tive aeronautics research for 2009/2010. In 
parallel, several project proposals selected in 2008 focus specifica lly on international 
aspects, such as urban traffic information sy stems, road safety, and mobility management 
for large events, such as the 2010 FIFA Wo rld Cup, which will be hosted by South 
Africa. 
                                                
 
53 See http://www.civitas-initiative.org/   
54 COM (2006)275 "Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union : A European vision for the 
oceans and seas" 
55 COM (2008)534 "A European strategy for Marine and Maritime Research: A coherent European 
Research Area framework in support of a sustainable use of oceans and seas" 
 
EN 24   EN 1.2.1.8. Socio-economic sciences and the humanities 
Research in the Theme 'Socio-economic Scie nces and Humanities' (SSH) is aiming at a 
better understanding of the major socio-eco nomic challenges such as employment, 
competitiveness, social cohesion, education, sustainability, migra tion and integration  that 
Europe is facing today. 
Following the first call for proposals, 29 projects were selected in 2008 covering 
globalisation, firms and the financial syst em, post-carbon society, rural regions and 
regional innovation, multilateralism in internat ional relations, democratic ownership and 
participation and foresight on science and technology. 
Among the projects selected, SOCIAL POLI S (Social platform on cities and social 
cohesion) involves significant stakeholders  from the scientific , civil society and 
governance sectors to establish ke y scientific and policy issues for the research agenda on 
cities and social c ohesion in Europe.  
The project PEGGED (the future of globa l economic governance) tackles the current 
globalisation and financial crisis. In a mo re complex and multi-polar world interwoven 
with bilateral agreements and rising financial ac tivities, global economic  governance is at 
a crucial crossroads. As it is unclear how c ooperation will be organised in the future, 
Europe must play a major ro le in the reform and reinforcement of global governance 
mechanisms. PEGGED covers four research domains: macro-economic adjustment and 
global governance, markets for finance and investment, trade in  goods and services, 
migration and mobility of labour. 
As to the project EUROPOLIS (A deliberativ e polity-making project), it will explore the 
forms of democratic deficit that directly a ffect EU citizens: woul d Europeans feel like 
they had more influence on the decision-making pr ocess in the EU if they were invited to 
voice their opinions to their fellow citizens? A delibera tive poll connected to the 
European Parliament elections will try to te st how a more deliberative democracy could 
work. 
During 2008 an important foresight exercise  on the "World in 2025" was conducted in 
close cooperation with the Bureau of Europ ean Policy Advisors. The final report is 
expected in early 2009 and should insp ire future European policies under the 
globalisation phenomena. The programme also launched several initiatives in order to 
strengthen its policy of international c ooperation. Two workshops were organised in 
Mexico with the Latin American  countries and in India in or der to find areas of mutual 
interest for cooperation in 2009 and 2010. 
In the area of humanities, the fourth annual HERA (Humanities in the European 
Research Area) conference “European Diversi ties - European Identities” co-organised by 
the European Science Foundation and the Commission took place in October 2008 in 
Strasbourg. This conference addressed the impo rtance of humanities research in helping 
to deliver social policy. It brought togeth er over 150 scholars and policy makers to 
discuss the role that collaborative resear ch can play in facing some of Europe’s 
challenges. It also reflected the questions of  identity that the field of humanities is now 
facing. The HERA conference showed that the tr ansnational, interdisciplinary approaches 
change the type of questions that humanitie s researchers can ask. Given the powerful 
technology and enormous amounts of data now available to modern researchers, these 
 
EN 25   EN approaches are likely to become the mode l for the humanities as it moves into the 21st 
century.  
1.2.1.9. Space The objective of Space resear ch is to support the European Space Policy focusing on 
applications such as GMES (Global Monito ring for Environment and Security), with 
benefits for citizens, but also other space foundation areas for the competitiveness of the 
European space industry. This will contribut e to fulfil the overall objectives of the 
European Space Policy, complementing effort s of Member States and of other key 
players, including the European Space Agency (ESA). 
In 2008, the second call for proposals was publis hed, and the call received 138 proposals, 
of which 88 proposals passed all the evaluation  thresholds. Of these, 24 projects have 
been short-listed for negotiations during 2009.  The selected projects are covering in a 
balanced way all main topics of the call aiming to achieve the policy objectives: 
– Space-based applications at the service of the European Society, with GMES (Global 
Monitoring for Environment and Security ) being central to this activity; 
– Providing R&D support to the foundations of  space exploration and space technology 
through synergies with initiatives of ESA or other European, national or regional 
entities. 
The actions proposed for funding cover all the topics of the call as follows:  
– 10 proposal in the area of GMES (downstream  services, monitoring of climate change, 
integration SatCom/SatNav with GMES) 
– 3 proposals in the area of In ternational Cooperation – GMES for Africa   
– 3 proposals in the “Strengtheni ng of Space Foundations” area - Space Exploration  
– 5 proposals in the “Strengtheni ng of Space Foundations” area - Space Technologies  
– 1 Coordination and Support Action in the topic “Support to New Member States and 
FP7 Associated Countries” 
– 2 Coordination and Support Actions in  the European Space Policy topic. 
The high oversubscription rate demonstrates the high interest of the Theme 'Space' : the 
total cumulative requested Community cont ribution of EUR 252.4 million corresponds to 
about five times the available budget. Almost  all Members states are involved in the 
retained projects
56. The participation of SMEs is high as they represent 25% (of 
requested Community contribution) of th e participants in retained projects. 
The European Space Agency is mana ging the GMES Space Component (GSC) 
development, and during 2008 a Delegation Ag reement for the FP7 contribution to the 
first Segment of this programme has been signed between the EC and ESA. Further negotiations for an extension of this agreement by a Segmen t 2 have been conducted, in 
preparation of the amendment af ter the approval of the Progr amme at ESA Ministerial at 
the end of Nov 2008. This brings the overall contribution of the Commission from FP7 to 
                                                
 
56 Except Bulgaria, Slovenia, Slovakia, Malta and Luxembourg . 
 
EN 26   EN the GSC Programme, which is designed to de velop operational GMES Sentinel satellites, 
to EUR 624 million (corresponding to about 30% of the total cost). 
1.2.1.10. Security The Theme 'Security' is a new theme in FP 7, and 2008 was the sec ond year of operation 
of this programme.  
The objective of the Security theme is: to  develop the technologies and knowledge for 
building capabilities needed to ensure the securi ty of citizens from threats such as acts of 
terrorism and (organised) cr ime, natural disasters and industrial accidents while 
respecting fundamental human rights including privacy; to ensure optimal and concerted 
use of available and evolving technologies to the benefit of civil European security; to 
stimulate the cooperation of providers and user s for civil security solutions; to improve 
the competitiveness of the European secur ity industry and to de liver mission-oriented 
results to reduce security gaps.  
The Security theme addresses four security  missions of high political relevance which 
relate to specific security threats:  
– Security of citizens,  
– Security of infrastruc tures and utilities,  
– Intelligent surveillance and border security, and  
– Restoring security and safe ty in case of crisis.  
It contributes to building up the necessary capabilities of the persons and organisations 
responsible for safeguarding security in thes e mission areas by fundi ng the research that 
will deliver the required technologies and know ledge to build up these capabilities.  
However, the use of security related technol ogies must always be embedded in political 
action. To support this and also to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
technology related research, three domains of cross-cu tting interest are included as well:  
– Security systems integration, interc onnectivity and in teroperability,  
– Security and society, and  
– Security research coordi nation and structuring.  
The Security theme aims at meeting its ma in objectives – improved security for the 
citizens, and enhanced competitiveness for indust ry - as substantiated in the topics of its 
‘demonstration projects‘ which wi ll be the ’flagships‘ of the Security theme. Successful 
demonstration of the appropriateness and perf ormance of novel solutions is a key factor 
for the take-up of the output  of the research work and its implementation by security 
policies and measures.  
Following the first call (FP7-SEC-2007-1) a nd the coordinated ca ll (FP7-ICT-SEC-2007-
1) with the Theme 'ICT' 39 pr ojects are on-going and 18 ar e expected to start in 2009. 
 
EN 27   EN The second main call (FP7-SEC-2009-1) was published in September 2008 with a 
deadline on 4 December. 196 proposals were received and evaluations were done over 
December 2008, January and February 2009 with  the help of more than 135 external 
experts. 27 are recommended for funding. The oversubscription, about 6 times, is still 
high. 
All the projects selected following these thr ee calls provide a good coverage of the four 
mission areas and an adequate balance betwee n large integration projects and research 
oriented capability projects. The geographical balance of the consortium is satisfactory. 
A quarter of all the participants are SMEs. 
1.2.1.11. Risk-sharing finance facility (EIB) More investment in research, development and innovation
57 was identified as a key 
priority action in the Lisbon Strategy to create a more competitive European economy 
based on knowledge and innovation. The Commi ssion has, in cooperation with the 
European Investment Bank (EIB), develope d the Risk-Sharing Fina nce Facility (RSFF), 
a new financial instrument to support European research a nd innovation in addition to the 
grants allocated in the FP7. 
Within the RSFF, FP7 and the EIB will ea ch provide up to EUR 1 billion over 2007-
2013 allowing a maximum of EUR 10 billion in loans and guarantees for investments in 
research, development and innovation. These co ntributions partially cover the credit risks 
associated with research-intensive companies and thus improve access to debt financing. 
Joint Technology Initiatives (JTI), resear ch infrastructures or large European 
collaborative projects58 as well as projects implemented by companies of any size, 
universities and research instit utes could benefit from the RSFF as it is tailored to 
individual needs.  
In 2008 decisions on signing 16 RSFF lending operations have been taken by the EIB. 
These involve projects in the field of re newable energy technologi es, engineering and 
automotive research and development, ICT a nd life sciences. Two of these operations are 
loans to intermediaries to provide risk -sharing financing to smaller borrowers.  
All projects benefiting from  the RSFF are located in the Member States (Austria, 
Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom), excep t two, which are located in Associated 
Countries (Israel and Turkey). A variety of  financial instruments have been used: 
corporate loans, project finance and risk-sharing bank facilities, the latter primarily for projects carried out by medium-sized and smaller companies.  
The Spanish company Solucar has been awarded EUR 50 million from the RSFF to 
further develop a large scale application of Con centrating Solar Power (CSP) technology 
to generate electricity without emitting a single puff of greenhouse gas. The Solucar 
Solar Thermal Power project is closely aligne d with EU energy policy to promote the use 
of indigenous renewable energy and thus cont ributes to both nationa l and EU efforts to 
combat climate change.  
                                                
 
57 The 2002 Barcelona European Council set the goal of raising overall research investment in the 
EU to approach 3% of GDP by 2010. 
58 Such as FP7 and EUREKA projects. 
 
EN 28   EN Up until now, mainly large and mid-caps59 or dedicated companies established in order to 
implement a particular demonstration project  have benefited from the RSFF. The SMEs60 
have not so far directly profited from the RSFF. However, the first project implemented 
by an SME in Slovenia has been  approved by the European Investment Bank's Board of 
Directors and should be signed in early 2009. Special effort is being made, notably by the 
EIB partner banks, to reac h potential SME clients. 
1.2.2. Ideas 
The FP7 "Ideas" Specific Programme aims to: 'reinforce excellence, dynamism and 
creativity in European research and improve the attractiveness of Europe for the best 
researchers from both European and third co untries, as well as fo r industrial research 
investment, by providing a Europe-wide competit ive funding structure, in addition to and 
not replacing national funding, for "frontier research" executed by individual teams.61 
The programme is implemented by the Europe an Research Council (ERC), consisting of 
a Scientific Council and a dedicate d implementation structure (DIS)62. The Scientific 
Council is an independent body representing Eu rope's scientific community made up of 
22 scientists, engineers and scholars of th e highest repute. The Scientific Council 
establishes the ERC's overall scientific strategy and decides on the type  of research to be 
funded and guarantees the quality of the ERC's activities from the scientific perspective. 
The role of the DIS is currently performed  by a dedicated service of the Commission 
(Directorate S of DG RTD). In the future, th is role will be filled by the ERC Executive 
Agency. Following its establishment in late 2007, substantial progre ss was made in 2008 
in setting up its institutional framework with a view to becoming administratively 
autonomous in mid-2009. 
The "Ideas" Specific Programme is implemented as two competitive funding schemes: 
Starting Grants which support re searchers at the early stage of their careers to enable 
them to become independent research leaders and Advanced Grants which support 
outstanding and establishe d research leaders. 
The first call for Starting Grants was publ ished in 2007 and negotiating and contracting 
moved at a steady pace and we re concluded in 2008. The firs t call for Advanced Grants 
was published in 2008, backed with an indicative budget of EUR 517 million. A total of 2167 proposals were submitted (997 in the physical  sciences, 766 in the life sciences and 
404 in social sciences and humanities). With  this budget 275 proposals were selected: 
114 in physical sciences, 84 in the life sciences, 48 in social sciences and humanities and 29 were considered under the new inter-disci plinary category. The pr ocess is overseen by 
a total of 25 panels led by Panel Chairs  who give it visibili ty and credibility. 
                                                
 
59 Middle Capitalization Company: co mpanies exceeding the limits that define SME in terms of 
number of employees and/or capitalization. 
60 According to the Commission's definition, these are companies with up to 250 employees and a turnover up to EUR 50 million or a balance sheet total up to EUR 43 million. 
61 Annex I of Council Decision 2006/972/EC of 19 December 2006 concerning the specific 
programme: "Ideas" implementing the Seventh Framework Programme of the European 
Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) 
(OJ L 400, 30.12.2006, p. 243). 
62 Article 1 Commission Decision 2007/134/EC of 2 February 2007 establishing the European 
Research Council (OJ L 57, 24.2.2007, p. 14). 
 
EN 29   EN The work programme 2009 included adjustments to  take into account lessons learnt from 
these first calls as well as the increase in  the ERC's funding resour ces. The large number 
of applications received for the 2007 Starting Grant put considerable strain on the ERC's 
resources and reduced the overall success rate to 3% for no other reason than the high 
number of applications submitted. For this reason, the "eligibility window" was narrowed 
and benchmarks to assess applicants' scien tific track record and a restriction on re-
submission of proposals were introduced. 
The implementation of the programme wa s accompanied by a sustained communication 
effort to raise the profile of the programme  as well as disseminate the results of the 
research it supported. The awardi ng of grants and the enthusiasm of grantees generated 
substantial media interest. The ERC partic ipated in a number of science fairs, 
conventions and conferences w ith an international reach as well as smaller information 
meetings in the participating countries. Scientific Council m eetings have been organised 
in a number of European cities, events whic h bring the ERC close to scientists working 
in countries participating in the programme. 
Further adjustments are foreseen to E RC processes in 2009 not only to enhance 
efficiency but also to address shortcomings noted in the general profile of applicants. A 
landmark review of structures and mechanisms, for which the terms of reference and methodology have been adopted
63, is expected to be carried out in 2009. 
1.2.3. People 
The "People" Specific Programme comprises the 'Marie Curie Actions' which aim to 
strengthen the human potentia l in research and technology and create an open, efficient 
and attractive European labour market for researchers. In 2008, 10 calls closed, corresponding to a total budget of EUR 617 million. 
The second Initial Training Networks (ITN)  call in 2008, aiming to improve young 
researchers' career perspectives in the public  and private sectors, selected 92 networks, 
funding approximately 50000 fellow/months, out  of the 886 proposals evaluated. These 
include challenging training programmes in areas  such as surgical solutions for spinal 
disease and trauma, and opportunities for socially vulnerable youth in Europe.  
COFUND
64 provides financial support to new or existing regional, national or 
international programmes in order to increase the possibilities for European-wide mobility of experienced researchers. Of 45 programmes replying to the first call for 
proposals, 24 have been funded and are now  in the process of launching calls for 
proposals. This action will ultimately lead  to the selection of  around 1600 fellowships, 
with an average duration of 19 months. Cof unded projects include programmes such as 
an EMBO fellowship programme for re searchers in molecular biology or 
multidisciplinary fellowship programmes including at regional level.  
Other actions for life long training and career development are Intra-European 
Fellowships (IEF), which offer individual fe llowships for experienced researchers in 
                                                
 
63 COM (2008) 526 "Communication on the Methodology and Terms of Reference to be used for the 
Review to be carried out by independent experts concerning the European Research Council Structures and Mechanisms" 
64 Marie Curie Co-funding of Regional, National and International Programmes 
 
EN 30   EN Europe, and Reintegration Gran ts, supporting the (re)integrat ion of resear chers after a 
period of mobility. In total 1757 IEF propos als were received in 2008 and 463 retained 
for funding. Out of 543 Reintegration Gr ant proposals, 320 we re funded, 185 being 
returns from outside Europe (mainly from the USA). 
The second Industry Academia Pathways and Partnerships (IAPP) call focused on 
building long-term cooperation between acad emia and industry, including SMEs. 141 
proposals were evaluated and 49 projects will be  funded in a wide range of scientific 
fields such as the optimizati on of industrial devices; using marine algae biomass for bio 
fuels; and novel genetic and phenotypic mark ers of Parkinson's disease. The IAPP call 
attracted 235 industria l applicants, of which 75% were SMEs. 
International Mobility is pr omoted by the Marie Curie World fellowships, composed of 
International Outgoing Fellowships (446 proposals submitted in 2008, of which 110 fellowships retained for funding), International Incoming Fellowships  (670 proposals 
submitted, of which 140 retained for funding)  and the International Staff exchange 
scheme (IRSES), a new FP7 action created to support research partne rships through staff 
exchanges between European research organisa tions and organisations  based in countries 
that have a scientific and technology agreement with the EU or who are part of the EU's 
Neighbourhood Policy. 73 proposals were su bmitted, of which 59, involving 151third 
country and 189 EC/Associated country research organisa tions, were retained for 
funding.Those include projects such as Heal thy Food For Life aiming at developing a 
unique health and food collaborative platfo rm to study health benefits of the 
Mediterranean diet with 27 invol ved research organisations in  5 EU member states and 3 
third countries.  
Promoting S&T careers (including for women)  and bringing down legal, institutional and 
cultural barriers to intersectorial, interdisciplinary, transnational and international mobility of researchers are crucial to adva nce scientific knowledge and technological 
progress, to enhance the quality of life and to reinforce European competitiveness. In this 
context, several policy initiatives have been undertaken by the Commission, including: 
the Communications "A mobility strategy for the ERA"
65 (2001) and "Researchers in the 
ERA: one profession, multiple carriers"66 (2003) endorsed by the Council, the "European 
Charter for Researchers and Code of C onduct for the Recruitment of Researchers"67 
(2005), the Green Paper "The ERA : New Perspectives"68 (2007).  
In addition, the new gateway "EUR AXESS – Researchers in Motion"69 was launched in 
2008 to improve the effectiveness and visibil ity of activities suppo rting researchers' 
mobility and career prospects. It is compos ed of four main sections: EURAXESS-Jobs 
(replacing the old recruitment tool Europe an Researcher's Mobility Portal); the 
EURAXESS Services network (replacing the former ERA-MORE Network); EURAXESS Rights (to promote the implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the R ecruitment of research ers), and EURAXESS 
Links (formerly the network for European re searchers abroad). Progress has also been 
                                                
 
65 COM (2001)331 "A mobility strategy for the European Research Area" 
66 COM (2003)436 "Researchers in the European  Research Area : One profession, multiple 
carreers'" 
67 Commission Recommendation of 11 March 2005 
68 COM (2007)161 
69 http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess  
 
EN 31   EN made in the implementation of the "Researcher's Directive"70 aimed at facilitating the 
entry and stay of third country researchers into the EU. So far, 23 countries out of 25 
Member States concerned have officially fi nalised the transposition of the directive and 
the process is going on in the two remaining Member States. The European Charter for 
Researchers and the Code of Conduct for their recruitment – a voluntary instrument 
which defines the entitlements and obligations of researchers – has been signed by nearly 
a thousand institutions from 28 countries.  
1.2.4. Capacities 
1.2.4.1. Research infrastructures 
Top-class scientific and technological deve lopment would not be possible without major 
instruments, installations and facilities. They are essential for both top-class research activities in basic and applied research, a nd for attracting young people to science. The 
existence of recognised world-level infrastructures allows Europe to remain strongly present in the international ‘research market ’. Construction and opera ting costs are high. 
No Member State on its own has the resour ces required to create the new large-scale 
infrastructures that are required to compete with the US and Japa n in particular. The 
Commission provides support for the developmen t of a European approach and for the 
operation and enhancement of existing infrast ructures, including e-Infrastructures, 
through the research infrastr uctures activity with a budget of approximately EUR 1.7 
billion.  
While in 2007 the FP7 research infrastructu re activity provided catalytic support and 
leverage for the so called "preparatory phase" of new research infrastructures identified by the ESFRI (European Strategic Forum for Research Infrastructures) roadmap, the support in 2008 concentrated on existing res earch infrastructure s through funding of 
"Integrating Activities". Thirty-eight projects that plan to optimise the resources and the 
use of existing research infrastructures at European level were recommended for funding 
and are currently under negotiation or being currently implemented.  
Among these, the EVA (European Virus Archiv e) project aims at developing a virus 
reference library in Europe which is readily accessible. The thousands of viruses that have been isolated and partly characterise d worldwide during the past 70 years or more 
indeed provide unique and extremely valuab le medical and educational resources to 
understand the basis of virus diseases, and to develop modern state of the art strategies 
for disease control. The 9 European partners  of EVA, from 6 different countries, are 
recognised as centres of excelle nce in virology with important collections of viruses. The 
project will coordinate these collections so that they can  be authenticated, amplified 
under quality-controlled conditions, stored long-term, and disseminated worldwide to laboratories engaged in fundament al and/or applied research as well as to industry. The 
network INCREASE is another example consisti ng of 6 infrastructure s (large-scale field 
sites) which allow experimental manipulation of climate (such as night-time warming and extended summer drought) through the creation of comprehensive databases, 
dynamic ecosystem models and effective scien tific collaboration on climate issues. In 
particular, INCREASE focuses on the impr ovement of technology and methodology for 
studies of climate change effects on European shrublands. 
                                                
 
70 Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-
country nationals for the purposes of scientific research 
 
EN 32   EN The 2008 activities on e-Infrastructures focused on the further development and 
evolution of the high-capacity and high- performance communication network GÉANT 
and on the deployment of scientific data infr astructure. As a result of the RI call-4 the 
GÉANT3 project and six projects within the data infrastructure were recommended for 
funding and are now in the contract conclu sion phase. GÉANT is the advanced pan-
European backbone network connecting Nati onal Research and Education Networks 
(NRENs) across Europe offering unrivalled ge ographical coverage, high bandwidth and 
innovative hybrid networki ng technology. GÉANT3 (the 3rd phase of GÉANT) will 
encompass 36 countries including the NREN or ganisations from all member states and 
will focus on advanced service provisioning. The selected data infrastructure projects 
covering a broad range of disciplines fr om Biosciences via Physics, Information 
technologies to Environmental and Earth scie nce address the challenge which poses the 
management of increasing amounts of scientific data on differe nt scientific communities.  
The conference on 'Research Infrastructures an d their structuring effect on the European 
Research Area' (ERA), held in Brdo, Slove nia, in March 2008, confirmed the important 
role of research infrastructures (including e-infrastructures) in contributing to sustainable regional development, economic growth and at tracting a new generatio n of scientists and 
engineers. 
The fifth European Conference on Research  Infrastructures, which took place in 
Versailles in December 2008, focused on the role  of Research Infrastructures to address 
economic challenges linked to the Lisbon object ives and major societal problems, such as 
environmental or health concerns. On th is occasion, the 2008 update of the ESFRI 
Roadmap was officially released. The conferen ce also highlighted the main issues to be 
addressed to realise the ESFR I roadmap projects, confirmed as a priority for Europe. 
In 2008 in the context of e-Infrastructures a nu mber of events were organized addressing 
specific e-Infrastructures topics . As a first example, the "Gl obal Leader Event" that was 
organised by GÉANT2 in March in Bled, Slovenia, gathered  almost 150 members of the 
global research networking community who took stock of  the current status and 
achievements of GÉANT2 and further discus sed on next challenges like on regional 
networks and links that  enable true global collaboration and on current and future uses of 
pan-European Networking.  
In May the TERENA Networking Conference 2 008 that was organise d by TERENA (the 
Trans-European Research and Education Networking Association) and hosted by 
BELNET (the Belgian national research and education network), focused on presenting, 
discussing and learning about the latest de velopments in networking technology for the 
research and education community and its use by the community. 
Two important events addressing e-Infrastruc ture policy aspects were organized by the e-
IRG (e-Infrastructure Reflection Group) policy committee. In March in Zürich an open 
workshop discussed on opportunities that aris e in enabling an easy and cost-effective 
shared use of distributed electronic resour ces across Europe based on the deployment of 
sustainable e-infrastructures. In a next e-IR G workshop in October in Paris, the needs of 
the ESFRI-roadmap projects with respect to e -Infrastructures were discussed and follow 
up actions were proposed.  
 
EN 33   EN 1.2.4.2. Research for the benefit of SMEs 
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME s) play a crucial role in European 
competitiveness and job creation, not only because they represent the overwhelming majority of enterprises in Europe, but also  because they are a source of dynamism and 
change in new markets, particularly thos e at the leading edge of technology. Although a 
heterogeneous community, they are all confr onted with increased competition resulting 
from the European internal market and the need to constantly innovate and accommodate advances of technology. The scheme for SM Es specific measures supports SMEs to 
outsource research and demonstration tasks to RTD performers; the funding rate for 
SMEs was increased from 50% to 75% in FP7. 
Two large FP7 Calls for Proposals were clos ed under the Research for the Benefit of 
SMEs Programme. Under the Research for SM Es call, 663 proposals were evaluated, of 
which 98 (14.8%) were retained  for funding. The call for Res earch for SME Associations 
yielded 383 proposals; evaluation will be  conducted in 2009. An analysis of the 
proposals submitted under the Research for SMEs call confirms that the programme is appropriately tailored to the needs of SM Es. The high quality of projects submitted and 
the large number of participating SMEs ( 66.5% of all participants in main-listed 
proposals) should make a profound economic impact.  
Many SME participants are repr esented by industrial organisa tions, clearly intending to 
apply project results to their own core businesses. A good example of how SMEs and 
research organisations can successfully coll aborate is given by the BCA-GRAPE project 
that aims to develop a new bi o-fungicide against a specific disease of grapevine. SMEs 
aim to increase crops while reducing the occurrence of diseases not effectively targeted by available products. The new non-chemical so lution has the potential to increase the 
efficacy of controlling the disease by 10% respect to the present situation and thus to contribute to saving about EUR 30 million per year on yield losses. The resulting 
reduction in chemical inputs by about 5300 tons per year will represent indirect impacts 
on the quality of life, health and working conditions of growers (about 1.5 million people 
full time in EU25), food safety, health  of consumers and the environment. 
The Council and the Parliament decided to support the Eurostars Joint Programme based 
on Article 169 of the Treaty by up to EUR 100 million. The programme is jointly 
undertaken by EUREKA countries , supporting transnational pr ojects initiated and led by 
R&D performing SMEs. Eurostars is expected to contribute to building the European 
Research Area by integrating the particip ating national programmes into a joint 
programme at European level. 
Two major policy support initiatives were la unched with the aim of  developing research 
policy measures better suited for European SMEs. An evaluation process was launched to 
assess the impacts on and the benefits for SM Es from participation in transnational 
research Cooperation under the SME specifi c measures (Co-operative and Collective 
Research) of the Fifth and Sixth Framew ork Programmes. The resulting study will 
examine how SMEs make use of  research resu lts and how the take- up of new technology 
influences their competitiveness. The results of  the evaluation are to be publicized in the 
third quarter of 2009. 
The Co-ordination and Support Action call was launched with the aim to obtain studies 
on regional, national and European SME research and technology-based innovation 
 
EN 34   EN support programmes and actions , providing insight into eff ective methods and practices 
of assisting and coaching SMEs from the birth of the project idea to the exploitation of 
research results. 
1.2.4.3. Regions of knowledge The Regions of Knowledge activity aims at strengthening the capac ities of EU regions 
for research and development in order to s upport the Lisbon objective of turning Europe 
into the most competitive knowledge-based society.  
In the context of this activity, research-based strategies for regional economic 
development are defined by bringing togeth er all regional stak eholders (public 
authorities, research centres, universities, busin ess) into regional research-driven clusters 
and promoting their cooperation throughout Europe. 
In order to implement those newly defined research strategies, action plans mobilise 
regional, national and European funding sour ces and address the potential synergies 
between European policies, especially the Research Framework Programme, the 
Competitiveness and Innovation Programme and the Structural Funds. 
Two calls for proposals were published in 2008 targeting the transna tional cooperation of 
existing clusters and the emergence of new ones. 16 projects are currently under 
negotiation for a total budget of EUR 10.6 m illion, covering 42 regions from 17 Member 
States. These projects mostly address en ergy and biotechnology and, to a lesser extent, 
the ICT sector and nano-materials. 
Among the proposals selected, INRES is based on the idea of bringi ng together regional 
research-driven clusters in three European insular regions: the Canary Islands (Spain), Crete (Greece) and Samsø (Denmark) to a ddress energy concerns and define a common 
strategy for the development of renewable energy technologies mainly derived from 
wind, the sun or biomass. This will reduce th e islands’ dependency on an external energy 
supply and, at the same time, reduce their energy costs. 
The main objective of SynBIOsis is to de velop and maximise synergies for unique 
research infrastructures in the field of bioinformatics, nano-biology, computational 
biology and biomedicine in Central Europe. Two partner regions, South Moravia (Czech 
Republic) and Friuli-Venezia-Giulia (Italy) intend to join forces in the design of a newly planned research infrastructure in Moravia primarily financed by the Structural Funds. 
The Italian partner region will use the experien ce of its existing research infrastructure 
(AREA Science Park with the Free Electron La ser), which forms part of the ESFRI Road 
Map, to help increase the economic relevance of research infrastr uctures by introducing 
effective collaboration with the business sect or. The project also aims at exchanging 
experience with other Central European  regions and extending the network to 
geographically proximate regions in order to seek complementarities. 
1.2.4.4. Research potential The Research Potential initiative is a new action dedicated to the realisation of the full 
research potential  of the enlarged Union by unloc king and developing existing or 
 
EN 35   EN emerging research potential in the European Union's convergence regions71 and 
outermost regions72. 20 of the 27 Member States and 6 Associated Countries are eligible. 
The convergence regions'  research actors are often said to be excluded from the 
European Research Area  and 'lose' out on the competitive approach of FP7, due to the 
brain drain, the lack of infras tructures and an ap propriate access to finance. The action 
aims to strengthen the research capacities  by establishing excellent scientific entities in 
these regions, thus allowing their researchers to successfully participate in European and 
international research activities a nd tackle the vari ety of challenges  they encounter. 
In 2008, a total of 505 proposals were submitted in response to two calls for proposals, 
41 were selected for funding with a Comm unity contribution of EUR 31 million. The 
selected proposals will permit the emergence of top class research centres in the EU's Convergence Regions and in Associated C ountries to FP7 and will also boost the 
economic development of the Convergence Regions where, up until now, mature low 
technology industries have had difficulty in  adopting new technological processes. 
Among the research proposals selected, the project RUN SEA SCIENCE investigates the 
integrity of the marine environment in Western Indian Ocean (WIO) states, among which Reunion Island is the only outermost region fr om continental Europe. The project focuses 
on the local critical mass and skill of res earchers in sea sciences, on increasing the 
visibility of the teams at regional and inte rnational levels, includi ng the EU, and on the 
bridging of gaps in technol ogy by setting up a pole of excelle nce in marine science at 
Reunion Island. The measures implemented duri ng the project will have several positive 
impacts on the economic aspects of fisheries and aquaculture, as well as on the social 
management of human practices in coastal areas, notably in marine protected areas, as 
the decrease of biodiversity and fish stocks in oceans and coas tal areas is mainly caused 
by human pressure on habitats and marine resources. 
The project WETLANET aims to enhance th e research potential of the Central 
Laboratory of General Ecology (CLGE) in Bu lgaria by strengthening the local laboratory 
network for studying wetlands' ecosystems. Th e specific goals include the exchange of 
know-how, the improvement of human potential , the upgrading of research laboratories, 
and further training possibilities of the research staff in an international scientific environment. The main expected outcome will be  the better integration of the CLGE into 
the European Research Area, enforcing we tland science within the region and the 
dissemination of achievements in this important scientific domain within the international community. 
1.2.4.5. Science in society Science in Society focuses on building an effective and democratic knowledge-based 
society, by ensuring the integration of scient ific and technological developments into 
European society. 
With regard to ethics in European and international research, the FP7 activities are 
carried out under a strict ethical framewor k. Therefore, the Commission constantly 
                                                
 
71 Convergence regions  are listed in the C(2006) 3475 and are defined as those regions having a per 
capita gross domestic product (GDP) of less th an 75% of the averag e GDP of the EU-25. 
72 Outermost regions  are defined according to article 299§2 of  the EC Treaty: Gu adeloupe, French 
Guiana, Martinique and Réunion, the Canaries, and the Azores and Madeira.  
 
EN 36   EN conducts ethics reviews of proposals, raisi ng ethical issues. By the end of 2008, 477 
ethical reviews had taken place under FP7. In addition, the process of ethics screening was introduced to guarantee an appropriate treatment of all proposals, raising ethical questions. 
In February 2008, the Commissi on released a Recommendation
73 to the Member States 
to adopt a Code of Conduct to govern res earch in the field of nanosciences and 
nanotechnologies (N&N)74. The Recommendation is in line with the objective to promote 
integrated safe and responsible N&N as a part of the 2005 Nanotechnologies Action 
Plan. In May 2008, the Commission had organised a first intern ational conference on the 
code of conduct and its content was we ll received by national and international 
stakeholders. This will have far-reaching implications beyond EU borders. 
An expert group on the "global governance of science" had been established in 2008 as 
was foreseen in the Science in Society Wo rk programme. Legal scholars, sociologists, 
philosophers and political sc ientists from Europe, the USA, China and South-Africa 
contributed to a report which seeks to a dvance a vision of global governance for the 
common good that invokes European princi ples of good governance and fundamental 
rights. The report addresses specific issues concerning global aspects of the European 
Research Area such as scie ntific misconduct, converging and or diverging ethical 
standards for research. 
Activities on the open access, publishing and dissemination of scientific information75, 
were distinctly amplified in  2008 within the scientific community and beyond. In this 
context, the most significant pilot pr oject on open access in FP7 was launched76. Its 
success was reinforced by SINAPSE77, a web communication plat form, which aims to 
use expertise in the EU governance (networkin g of advisory bodies) in a more efficient 
way, to support the expert groups, ad-hoc/public  consultations or e-debates, and to create 
e-communities. In 2008, 1689 members and 259 or ganisations registered in SINAPSE, 
reaching a total of 4988 and 1150 respectively since the start in 2005. 
The 20th anniversary of the European Union Contest for Young Scientists took place in 
September in Copenhagen, Denmark. The contes t involved 32 EU and Associated States, 
representatives from the European Schools, as  well as contestants from Brazil, Canada, 
China, Mexico, New Zealand, Nigeria and the United States. The three first prizes went 
to the projects from Poland (mathematics), Slovakia (engineering) and the UK (earth sciences). For the first time the Commission awarded a Prize for International Cooperation, which went to a project in the area of medical sciences  from New Zealand.  
In the context of strengthening and devel oping human potential activities 2008 has been a 
year of consolidation. 
Two projects, DIVERSITY and WHIST, were  selected for funding to formulate 
measures for changing the "mind-set" of the research community with regard to gender diversity in recruitment and career development policies in research organisations - in 
                                                
 
73 C (2008) 424 
74 Following a consultation on the Code of Conduct in July 2007 
75 Initiated already in 2007 
76 http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/open_access/  
77 http://europa.eu/sinapse  
 
EN 37   EN particular in terms of increasing the partic ipation of women at th e highest levels of 
research.  
The "Women in Research Decision-Making " expert group published its final report 
"Mapping the maze: getting women to the top in research" in 2008. Among its findings was that the commitment of research decision -makers is needed, and that transparent and 
fair evaluation and promotion procedures alone are not sufficient to improve gender 
balance in research decision-making. A change of  culture in research institutions is also 
required. 
With the support of Member States represen tatives the report "B enchmarking of policy 
measures for gender equality in science" gi ves an overview of current policies throughout 
Europe, and provides an original  statistical analysis linking po licy with number of female 
scientists. The statistical analyses show that the presence of certain equality measures is linked with the rates of partic ipation of women in science. 
Two calls for proposals in the area of s upporting science education were published in 
March (EUR 4.8 million) and September (EUR  7.5 million). One large project is under 
negotiation and others are being evaluated. These calls target inquiry based science 
education techniques and follow closely th e recommendations of  the expert report 
"Science Education Now: a Renewed Pedagogy fo r the Future of Europe". The high level 
of interest in terms of proposals submitted to these calls demonstrates that not only is the 
subject matter recognised as be ing crucial to the developm ent of human resources in 
Europe but that there is broad scope  for collaborative European actions. 
In line with the 2006 Communi cation "Delivering on the Modernisation Agenda for 
Universities: Education, Research, I nnovation" on the challenges for European 
university-based research
78, several initiatives have been  taken in 2008, such as the 
delivery of the expert group report on the imp act of external project-based research 
funding on the financial management of universit ies. It provides an overview of external 
project-based funding, stresses the role of external funding in the modernisation process 
of universities, and proposes adequate action lines to be taken at European and national 
level. 
1.2.4.6. Activities of international cooperation FP7 places a new emphasis on international research cooperation, wh ich is increasingly 
seen as being at the centre of Community policies. In order to become more competitive 
and play a leading role at world level, Eur ope needs a strong and coherent international 
science and technology policy. To this end, the 'Strategic European Framework for International S&T Cooperation'
79 adopted in 2008  will increasingly help to make 
European research actions for international cooperation more coherent and efficient and 
help to respond to th e aspirations of potential partne rs in neighbouring countries and 
worldwide. 
                                                 
78 COM(2006)208 "Delivering on the modernisation agenda for universities: Education, Research, 
Innovation" 
79 COM (2008)588 "A strategic European framework for international science and technology 
cooperation" 
 
EN 38   EN The "Strategic European Framework" stre sses the importance of developing the 
partnership between Member States and the Commission to strengthen coordination and 
create synergies in S&T cooperation with the rest of the world. Council Conclusions 
were adopted on 2 December endorsing th e concept and making provisions for the 
establishment of a dedicated  configuration of CREST to  be known as the Strategic 
Forum for International S&T Cooperation. Th e Forum has been mandated "To facilitate 
the further development, implementation and monitoring of the international dimension 
of ERA by the sharing of information and consultation between the partners (Member 
States and the Commission) with a view to  identifying common prio rities which could 
lead to coordinated or joint initiatives, and coordinating activities and positions vis-à-vis 
third countries and within  international fora." 
In 2008, six INCO-NET projects were launch ed in the framework of bi-regional 
coordination of scientific and technology (S &T) cooperation, with an overall budget of 
EUR 17.5 million covering the following regi ons: Western Balkan Countries (WBC), 
Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA), Mediterranean Partner Countries (MPC), 
South East Asia, Latin America and Sub- Saharan Africa. The concept of the WBC-
INCO.NET project is to  promote a strategic partnership with an intense programme of 
coordination and networking activities in the field of RTD between the European Union, 
Associated Countries and Western Balkan C ountries. The project intends to identify RTD 
priorities which could eventually be taken- up in forthcoming FP7 calls and to enhance 
the participation of researchers from the WB C in European projects of mutual interest 
and benefit. 
Bi-lateral coordination for the enhancement and development of S&T partnerships with 
targeted countries that have signed or are in the process of signing an S&T agreement 
with the Community (BILAT) can best be illu strated by two of the 11 successful projects 
that were signed in 2008 with a total budget of EUR 6.4 million. The project BILAT-
RUS focuses on support of sustainable implementation of the Common Space on 
Research, Education and Culture between the EU and Russia, whereas the project 
BILAT-UKR will strengthen the S&T coopera tion between the EU and the Ukraine. 
ERA-NET and ERA-NET PLUS projects enhanc e coordination of national policies and 
programmes of Member States and Associated  States in international S&T cooperation 
with third countri es' participation. Among the 5 proposals  selected, New INDIGO aims at 
analysing existing bilateral activities and pr ogrammes between Member States and India 
and enhancing networking to ultimately prov ide a framework for joint activities between 
European countries and India. 
1.2.4.7. Risk-sharing finance facility (EIB) See 1.2.1.11. 1.2.4.8. Coherent development of research policies Achieving the aspiration of the Lisbon Stra tegy to transform the EU into a knowledge-
based society requires more and better invest ment in R&D. Ensuring progress towards 
the objective of investing 3% GDP in R& D and achieving an open and competitive 
European Research Area (ERA) are two mutua lly reinforcing objectives which are vital 
in this respect. Both of these aspirations can  only be attained when policy-makers at all 
levels (regional, national, European) are committed to developing their policies in coherence with each other towa rds a common set of objectives.  
 
EN 39   EN This activity Coherent development of resear ch policies aims to stimulate the coherent 
development of research po licies by supporting policy-making based on reliable evidence 
and by facilitating the coordination of  research policies across Europe. 
The Open Method of Coordination (OMC) pr ovides Member States with an opportunity 
to learn from each other, exchange expe rience and identify good pr actice. The OMC in 
the field of research policy is supervised  by the Scientific a nd Technical Research 
Committee (CREST) through a system of yearly  cycles. Each cycle focuses on a limited 
number of policy issues. In 2008, working groups were established to work on the 
following topics: universities, industry-led competence centre s, internationalisation of 
R&D and policy mix peer reviews. All gr oups finalised their work in early 2009. 
Throughout 2008, an expert group performed an independent assessment of the impact 
generated by the OMC at national level. The main conclusions of the expert group were 
that the OMC has created an entirely new approach to Community and Member State 
research policy-making and that it has had a positive impact in terms of policy learning at national level
80. The expert group recommended focusing future OMC work on a 
"coordination through learning" approach. 
To complement the multilateral OMC process the OMC-NET call scheme was 
developed. The objective of this scheme is to support mutual learning and policy 
coordination activities carried out by more limited groups of Member States and/or their 
regions on policy issues of their specific interest. As a result of a call launched in September 2007, seven projects were selected for funding. 
Further editions of the Science, Tec hnology and Competitiveness Key Figures report
81 
and the Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard82 were published. The Key Figures report 
provides the most recent data on Eur ope's position in R&D. The Industrial R&D 
Investment Scoreboard analyses private R& D investment and the strategies of 2000 
companies around the world. Publications such as  these help to raise the awareness of the 
challenges European R&D faces and of the possible policy responses. 
By the end of 2008, a number of activities were  launched to take stock of progress made 
since the launch of the Lisbon Strategy and of  the 3% objective and to prepare for the 
post-2010 period. Apart from a study on sectoral R&D intensity evolutions, this involved 
the creation of three expert groups on th e following topics: the role of Community 
instruments in building a knowle dge-based society; the 3% objective (i.e. progress made 
and post-2010 scenarios); and indicators  to measure progress towards ERA. 
Another expert group report was published on "S trengthening research institutions with a 
focus on university-based research"83. It presents specific recommendations on the 
modernisation of universities, including aspects such as university funding and 
autonomy, governance, accountability and perf ormance, collaboration, partnerships and 
human resources, and ways to improve the overall research quality in universities. 
                                                 
80 The report of the expert group is available at http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-
research/pdf/download_en/eur_23874_texte_web.pdf  
81 See http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/pdf/key-figures-report2008-2009_en.pdf  
82 See http://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/re search/scoreboard_2008.htm  
83 The expert group report is available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/dgs150_era_greenpaper_eg3_en_080403.pdf  
 
EN 40   EN 1.3. FP7: Direct actions by the Joint Research Centre 
The mission of the Joint Research Centre is  to provide customer-d riven scientific and 
technical support for the con ception, development, implementation and monitoring of 
European Union policies. As a service of the European Commission, the Joint Research 
Centre functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to 
the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special intere sts, whether private or national. 
A panel of 14 international experts led by Si r David King has comp leted an in-depth 
review of work carried out  by the Joint Research Centre from 2002 to 2006 under the 
Sixth Framework Programme for Resear ch and Technology Development (FP6)
84. 
Success factors were identified as: delivering continued service to the European Commission without compromi sing scientific vitality or  integrity; responding to 
customer needs; integration of the seven research Institute's competencies and facilities around thematic priorities; increased ne tworking activities ac ross Europe and 
internationally; enhanced researcher traini ng; and assisting Candida te Countries in the 
last steps of the ĖU accession process. The report singles out as special achievements the 
JRCs role in assisting new Member States in the uptake of EU le gislation, delivering 
well-respected international services in seve ral areas of competence, and in enhancing 
the training of European researchers. 
Activity 1 directly financed research FP7 EC  
In the area of Health and consumer pr otection, the JRC publis hed a study entitled 
"Scientific and technical contri bution to the development of an overall health strategy in 
the area of GMOs (genetically modified organisms)". 
The year 2008 represented a milestone in the hi story of the European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) 
marking its fifteenth year of activity evaluating dangerous chemicals, and at the same time, the accomplishment of its tasks and handover of th e activities to the newly created European 
Chemicals Agency (ECHA). 
Within the scope of the recent financial crisis and in order to reinforce the stability of the 
financial system, the JR С contributed to the revision of  EU rates on Deposit Guarantee 
Schemes which are a key element of the financia l safety net ensuring that, if a bank fails, 
depositors will be able to recover at least a pa rt of their mone y. This increases confidence in 
the banking sector and avoi ds bank runs leadi ng to severe economic consequences. 
The functioning of Deposit Guarantee Schemes is regulated in the EU by the Directive 
94/19/EC. A revision of this Di rective has being going on for the last few years and the JRC 
supported this process by providing a number of technical studies. 
In 2008, the JRC released a new reference material certified for the mass concentration of 
12 serum proteins. Measurements of serum ar e used for the diagnos is of many conditions 
including infection, live r or kidney disorders, ir on deficiency, malnutriti on and the monitoring 
of autoimmune diseases. Consequently, they are amongst the most important measurements done in clinical chemistry. The International Federation of Clinical 
                                                
 
84 Report available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/downloads/2008_expost_fp6_evaluation_final_report_en.pdf   
 
EN 41   EN Chemistry (IFCC), which actively supports standa rdisation in clinical chemistry, collaborated 
with the JRC on the development of this material. 
On Nanotechnology the European Commission's  communication on regulatory aspects of 
nanomaterials (COM (2008) 366) reported that  the scientific basis needed to fully 
understand all properties and risks of nanomaterials is insufficient. It concluded that rapid 
improvement of scientific kn owledge, such as data on toxic effects and specific 
characteristics of nanomaterials, was requi red. To better understand the correlations 
between structural and f unctional properties of n ąnoparticles, one needs to accurately 
measure their physicochemical characteristics. The key measurement is expected to be the 
analysis of the particle  size. The JRC is also investigati ng the potential toxicological effects 
of nąnoparticles, focusing on their physico-chem ical characteristics and biological activity. 
The activity has been developed in collaboration with scientific partners and international organisations. 
The JRC published a report in 2008,  entitled, "Adop tion and performance of  the first GM crop 
introduced in EU agriculture: Bt maize in Spai n", presenting the results of a field survey of 
commercial maize farmers in Spain - the largest EU produc er of GM maize. This st udy looks 
for the first time into the agronomic and ec onomic performance of a GM crop in Europe 
(Bt maize) during three growing seasons (2002-4) . Researchers also look ed into the profile 
of farmers who adopted Bt maize versus those who did not. 
Contributions to the environment and climate change dealt with the shared Environmental 
Information System (SEIS) (COM (2008)46) which modernise and simplify the collection, exchange, and use of environmental information. It builds on three pillars: 
– INSPIRE (Infrastructure for Spatial Inform ation in Europe Directive (2007/2/EC); 
– GEOSS (Global Earth-Observation System of Syst ems, an international initiative to link 
earth observing systems; 
– GMES (Global Monitoring for Environm ent and Security) (COM(2008)748) which 
aims to develop a European independent capacity for monitoring the Earth's environment 
and security threats, and co ntribute new services to SEIS (Shared Environmental 
Information System). 
The JRC ensures the technical coherence of SEIS, INSPIRE, GMES and GEOSS and 
provides contents thro ugh two data centres: 
The European Forest Data Cent re (EFDAC) which is the focal point for data and information 
on forests in Europe, and the European Soil Da ta Centre (ESDAC) which is the thematic 
centre for soil-related data in Europe and has been established according to a decision taken by the European Commission's Enviromnent DG, the JRC, the European Statistical Office (EUROSTAT) and the European Environment Agency. 
A key contribution to the Eur opean and internati onal discussion on the consequences of 
climate change has been provi ded by the JRC reference repor t, "Impacts of Europe's 
changing climate". The report, jointly prepar ed with the European Environment Agency 
and the World Health Organizat ion, analyses a wide range of  fields and highlights that 
vulnerability to climate change varies wi dely across regions a nd sectors in Europe. 
 
EN 42   EN In the area of sustainable energy the JRC was th e co-ordinator and opera tor of the Information 
System of the European Strategic Ener gy Technology Plan (S ETIS) -open access 
information and knowledge mana gement system designed to provide regular and reliable 
information and data for eff ective strategic planning. The JRC contributed to the sec ond 
Strategic European Energy Review which fo cused on energy security and solidarity. 
The report "Biofuels in the European context:  facts and uncertaintie s" was published in 
March 2008 as a contribution to the Commission's "Proposal  for a Directive of the 
European Parliament and of the Council on  the promotion of the use of energy from 
renewable sources (COM(2008)19 )"- The document integrated the work of several JRC 
Institutes and added some  of the latest information availabl e on indirect effects of biofuels 
production in developing count ries. It provided significant input to the development of 
policy. 
Response to crises in 2008 
In 2008, the JRC continued its efforts to enhance the capacity  of the European Commission 
to anticipate, prepare a nd respond to crises. In co-operation with the European  Union Satellite 
Centre (EUSC), a civilian damage  assessment of transport infrastructure as well as residential 
and non-residential structures in  the core conflict area of the Georgian Territory was carried 
out. 
In 2008, the European Co mmission and Member States worked  closely together to prepare 
for the then coming forest fire season, build ing on the lessons learnt from the tragic 
experiences of 2007. Five Member States and the Eur opean Commission's disaster 
Monitoring and information Centre ( ШС) were involved in a large-scale simulation exercise 
in Sardinia that ran from 16 to 29 April 2008. 
Activity 2 directly finan ced research FP7 EURATOM  
The JRC's objectives in the Euratom programme  are to provide relevant scientific and 
technical data in the fields of reactor and fuel cycle safety including waste management, 
nuclear security and basic sciences. In part icular, in the 2008, the following achievements 
were reached. 
Nuclear Safety: JRС research on nuclear safety has c ontributed to improving the safety of 
nuclear power plants in the new Member States. Moreover, the JR С has launched, in the 
interest of European national safety authorities, the 'Nuclear Safety Clearing House', aiming at delivering analyses and feed-bac k recommendations on operational events in 
nuclear plants. The JR С paved the way to the accession of Euratom to the "Generation IV 
International Forum" which aims to develop th e fourth generation of nuclear reactors by 2030 
with improved safety, co st, non-proliferation and waste mana gement features. In this way, 
the JRС opened the opportunity to contribute to th is initiative for all Member States who wish 
do so, thus contributing to ensuring that European  nuclear know-how and skills will retain their 
leadership. 
Nuclear Security: the JRС contributed to enhanc e the nuclear security in the EU through its 
scientific support to the Euratom inspectorates includ ing training and technological 
improvements provided to the European reproc essing plants in Sellafield (Great Britain) 
and La Hague (France). The JR С has successfully traced the origin of several finds of illicit 
nuclear materials (Germany, Slovakia, The Netherlands) and thus provided essential 
 
EN 43   EN support to the competent author ities in Member States as well as the International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA) in their investigations. 
Basic sciences: The JRС research programme in fundamenta l sciences has le ad to advances 
in the medical field (cancer therapy), and in the understanding the physics of actinides, and has 
been a key player in the Eu ropean education and traini ng networks of scientists. 
1.4. Research and training actions under the EURATOM Treaty 
Fusion energy  
The objective of fusion research in the 7th Euratom Framework Programme is to develop 
the knowledge base for, and to realise ITER as the major step towa rds, the creation of 
prototype reactors for power stations that  are safe, sustainable, environmentally 
responsible, and economically viable. ITER aims to demonstrate the scientific and 
technological feasibility of fu sion energy to reach this goal. It will produce, for extended 
periods, significantly more pow er from fusion reactions than is needed to sustain the 
plasma, with steady-state operation as an ultima te goal. In addition, the ITER device will 
demonstrate the performance and integration of fusion technologies, and test components 
for a future reactor. The construction of ITER is accompanied by a strong and focussed 
European programme to prepare for the exploitation of ITER and to develop the technologies and knowledge base that will be needed during its operation and beyond. 
During 2008, Europe was the major contributor to the advancement of the ITER project, 
providing more than half of the professional staff and progressing in  the preparation of 
the ITER site in Cadarache,  France, where the site leve lling has been completed. A 
significant achievement in 2008 was the completion of the ITER design review, which confirmed the general validity  of the ITER design, although pointing out the need of 
introducing a number of additiona l features recognised by a ll Parties as necessary for 
completeness and for reducing the technical ri sks to the project mission. Reassessment of 
the design resulted also in the update, by two se parate panels of independent experts, of 
the estimates of the resources needed by the ITER International Or ganization (IO) and by 
the European Joint Undertaking 'Fusion for Energy' (F4E) respectiv ely. The reports of 
the panels indicate that the estimated costs for ITER will be significantly higher than 
initially planned, in particular for the Eur opean in-kind contribu tion to be provided 
through F4E. Several recommendations put forw ard to improve the management within 
the ITER IO and the interaction between th e ITER IO and the Domestic Agencies are 
now being taken into account. The aim of thes e recommendations is to integrate technical 
requirements with considerations of prac ticality and cost containment. Although 
significant variations in cost  and schedule appear unavoidabl e, further effort is ongoing 
to achieve a consensus among the ITER Partie s on a Project Baseline  (scope, cost, and 
schedule) at the November 2009 ITER Council meeting. 
F4E achieved full autonomy in all its functions  early in the year and continued to build 
up the body of highly qualified staff which it needs. The first Calls for Tender for services and ITER procurement contracts we re launched. Progress in  the projects under 
the Broader Approach Agreement with Japa n included the completion and adoption of 
the Integrated Design for the JT-60SA tokama k in Japan. The cons truction of JT-60SA 
can now begin.  
A panel of independent high-level experts appointed by the Commission carried out a 
review motivated by the need to support the rapid and efficient development of fusion as 
 
EN 44   EN an energy source and to maintain in the progr amme the facilities needed to fulfil its 
medium and long term objectives. The report of the panel outlined a vision of the R&D 
required and reviewed the si gnificant facilities (exi sting, under construction and 
proposed) needed to support this R&D. The pa nel underlined the quality of the research 
community, the coherence of the programme  and the essential role played by the 
European fusion laboratories. It recommended a roadmap for facilities, prioritised according to their importance for ITER and DEMO. 
Integration of the fusion programme under the coordination of EFDA (the European 
Fusion Development Agreement) was further strengthened in 2008 through additional Euratom financial support for priority trai ning and research actions, including the 
procurement of a High Performance Computer (HPC) for Fusion Applications as a joint 
research infrastructure in support of I TER and DEMO. EFDA also coordinated the 
scientific exploitation of the JET facility, which is aimed at consolidating the ITER 
design, defining auxiliary systems and optimis ing future ITER operations. Preparations 
for a shutdown of the facility which will begin in 2009 to install further ITER-relevant 
components made substantial progress.  
Fission & Radiation Protection
 
FP7 continues to provide support for R&D in EU  Member States in a range of important 
areas, from fission energy technology to nucle ar safety, radioactive waste management 
and radiation protection. EU energy policy, in particular th e Strategic Energy Technology 
(SET) Plan, provides an emergi ng and crucial additional focus for this research effort, 
though the Euratom programme still maintains its important input in areas such as nuclear safety and radiation protection.  
Approximately EUR 51 million of FP7 fundi ng was made available in 2008 for support 
to research in the broad area of nuclear fissi on and radiation protection. In response to the 
call for proposals published  in late 2007, DG-RTD servic es received a total of 42 
proposals, 4 of which failed to meet one or mo re of the elig ibility criteria and of the 
remaining 38 evaluated by the independent ex perts, 9 were considered to be below 
threshold. Eighteen proposals we re ranked for immediate grant negotiations. In  total, the 
38 evaluated proposals were requesting mo re than EUR 78 million of FP7 funding. 
The principal concern of the Euratom programme  is to ensure that the support in fission 
and radiation protection remains as effective and relevant as possible by maximising the 
coordination with national and industrial research programmes in Europe. The 
Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform (SNE-TP)
85, the embryonic 
"Implementing Geological Disposal  Technology Platform" (IGD-TP)86, and MELODI87 
are all producing Strategic Research Agenda s (SRAs) enabling the Euratom effort to 
maintain this focus. Through such initiatives  a true European Re search Area (ERA) is 
being established in the nuclear sector. 
Covering the field of nuclear systems and safety, SNE-TP presented its SRA at the 
platform's first General Assembly on 26 November 2008. This will promote R&D 
cooperation in fields such as continued sa fe operation of current  reactors and the 
                                                 
85 http://www.snetp.eu   
86 http://www.igdtp.eu   
87 "Multidisciplinary European Lo w-Dose Initiative" (MELODI), http://www.hleg.de   
 
EN 45   EN development of the next (4th) generation of nuclear r eactor technology. The latter 
includes both fast neutron reactors and high-te mperature reactors for the cogeneration of 
electricity and process heat for industrial applications (e.g. hydrogen production). Today, 
SNE-TP has more than 60 members from 19 co untries and represents all key European 
R&D players in this field. Future Euratom FP7 calls for proposals will incorporate key 
actions in line with SRA priorities. 
In October 2008, the 7th Euradwaste conference88 was held in Luxembourg. This major 
international event, organised by DG-RTD, wa s a showcase for current Euratom research 
on geological disposal of radioactive waste as  well as techniques such as "partitioning 
and transmutation" to reduce waste volumes or radiotoxicity. The conference also saw 
key discussions on establishing IGD-TP, with  considerable progress being made in 
defining the common vision for R&D in the ar ea of geological dispos al. This technology 
platform will be formally launched during 2009, with the ai m to coordinate 
implementation-oriented R&D in support for the deployment of the first geological 
repositories in Europe by 2020-25. 
The other important ERA initiative, MELODI , was formally established by the High-
Level and Expert Group (HLEG) on low-dose risk towards the end of 2008. MELODI 
will ensure a strategic approach to low-dos e research within Europe, including joint-
programming type activities covering topics  such as radiobiology and effects on the 
genome, DNA damage, radio-sensitivity, etc. In support of this initiative, a major Network of Excellence is foreseen in th e 2009 Euratom call, published in late 2008.  
The Euratom programme is pr omoting international cooper ation where there is clear 
mutual interest and benefit.  In 2008, a further meeting of the joint Euratom / ROSATOM 
working group on fission R&D co operation identified specific t opics for insertion in the 
2009 Euratom FP7 call for proposals. In Octo ber, a meeting took place in China to 
endorse a similar approach with Chinese R&D stakeholders. A Euratom-China fission 
R&D seminar took place in early  2009 in order to identify  topics for the 2010 Euratom 
call. Regarding multilateral cooperation, Euratom maintains its commitment to the Generation-IV International Forum (GIF) a nd key projects launc hed following the 2008 
call will contribute to this global initiative. 
1.5. Completion of previous Framework Programmes and other activities 
In July 2008, the expert group for the ex-post evaluation of FP6 met for the first time to 
proceed with their findings on the achievemen ts, design and implementation of previous 
framework programme for research and techno logical development. In addition to this 
general evaluation, detailed assessments are still being carried on the economic, social 
and environmental impacts of the research activities, funded under the Specific 
Programmes of FP6.  
In the field of health, the FP6 Integrated  project VIZIER (Comparative Structural 
Genomics of Viral Enzymes Involved in Replication)
89 initiated the collaboration of 23 
leading European laboratories to determine the 3D-stuctures of virus proteins needed for 
virus replication, in or der to develop new drugs against viruses such as Avian Flu, SARS, 
                                                 
88 Euradwaste'08 – proceedings available at http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/euratom-
fission/euradwaste2008_en.html   
89 EUR 12.9 million, started 1 Nov. 2004, 4 -year project 
 
EN 46   EN Chikungunya, Dengue, West Nile, Ebola, M easles, and Hepatitis. Through close 
partnerships with major players from the pharmaceutical industry such as Novartis and 
Sanofi-Aventis, 300 viruses were examined. VI ZIER successfully laun ched an antiviral 
drug to combat the Chikungunya virus90 and conducted a resear ch project on the Dengue 
virus91. 
The field of food was marked by the succe ssful completion of two projects. HELENA 
was launched to provide an overview of fitn ess and physical activity patterns of 3000 
adolescents from 13 to 17 years old in Eu rope and to enhance their nutritional and 
lifestyle habits. Using a common methodol ogy across 10 EU countries, the project 
enabled policy makers to develop effective recommendations for the future. Taking into 
account a broad range of ethical, social  and economical factors, the SAFE FOODS  
project  developed a new Risk Analysis Model for foods produced by different breeding 
approaches and production practises. Due to  its transparency and newly developed 
methods, this model will have significant im plications for better risk identification, 
management and assessment, easily applicable  by various stakeholders such as risk 
assessors, regulatory bodies, food pro ducers and consumer organisations. 
In the field of socio-economic sciences and the humanities, the project CHALLENGE  
succeeded in defining and facilitating respons ible judgements on new security policies 
and practices, to minimise the restrictions on liberties and, thus, to foster democratic 
accountability. 
In the field of industrial t echnologies, the KMM Network of  Excellence (NoE) aimed at 
mobilisation and concentration of the fragmented scientific potential in the field of intermetallics, metal-ceramic composites and functionally graded materials (abbreviated as KMM) to create a durable and efficient st ructure capable of developing leading-edge 
research while spreading the accumulated knowledge outside the Network and enhancing 
the technological skills of the related industrie s. KMM-NoE focused on understanding, 
designing and developing new mate rials with superior properties
92. Target applications of 
KMM are in aerospace and automotive transp ort, energy and machinery industries, 
electronics and biomedical industry.  
The FP6 Audit Strategy contributes  to the reasonable assurance of the relevant Directors-
General that the resear ch budget under their responsibility is spent in compliance with the 
regulatory framework.  
The implementation of the FP6 Audit Strategy has meant a significant cultural change, 
through a reinforced focus on audit and control matters. The Audit Strategy has 
strengthened the audit and control pillar of the research process cycle and it has also led to a large increase of staff with auditing, accounting and control skills. 
In this first period of the implementation of  the FP6 Audit Strategy the focus has been on 
a substantial increase in the number of aud its, the improvement of the consistency of 
approach and more homogeneous audit pol icies (including repor ting and documenting), 
                                                
 
90 In collaboration with Sanofi-Aventis and UVE from  the Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille 
91 In collaboration with the CNRS, Marseille 
92 Such as lower density, high strength and hardness, excellent performance in high-temperature 
regimes, enhanced fracture toughness and fatigue lifetime, superior resistance to wear, corrosion 
and oxidation. 
 
EN 47   EN the calculation of a reliable er ror rate, presentations to the potential auditees and the 
introduction of the extr apolation procedure.  
The number of audits closed to date – i.e. at  the mid-term stage of the implementation of 
the Audit Strategy - is impressive: more than 1000 FP6 audits have been closed covering 
2130 participations. The audited amount of  Community contributions in a FP has 
previously never been as high (close to EUR 800 million).  
Reliable, statistically representative results, in  terms of error rates, are available in order 
to assess the regular ity and legality of the underl ying transactions under FP6. The 
cumulative error rate at the end of 2008, stood at 2.9%. The audit information will also be useful for future efforts of simplification. 
1.6. Research programme of the Re search Fund for Coal and Steel 
On 29 April 2008, the Council adopted a deci sion on the revised multiannual technical 
guidelines governing the res earch programme of the RFCS
93, whilst further improving 
complementarity with the Seventh Research Framework Programme (FP7) and taking account of the recent EU enlargement steps. These new guidelines introduced a number of simplified administrative and operationa l procedures and increased the financial 
support from 40 to 50% for pilot and demonstr ation projects. The research programme of 
the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) , that is separate and complementary to 
FP7, covers all aspects of coal and steel, fr om production processes to application. This 
programme has an annual budget of approxim ately EUR 55 million for research in these 
two areas, financed by the interest on the a ssets of the now expire d European Coal and 
Steel Community Treaty. In 2008, of a total of 21 and 97 proposals r eceived respectively, 
9 new coal and 44 new steel-related project s were financed by EU support for a total 
amount of EUR 50.72 million. 
One of the priorities of the EU is to redu ce carbon emissions. Therefore, the Commission 
supports research on coal-based  power generation with the ai m of releasing significantly 
less CO
2 into the atmosphere. One possible means to achieve nearly zero CO 2 emission 
coal power plants is the chemical loopi ng technology, combining very low efficiency 
penalties and low CO 2 capture costs. The ECLAIR pr oject, which started in 2008 and 
carries out theoretical and e xperimental work to provide  the basis for design and 
optimisation of the technology which paves th e way for power producers to build coal 
power plants with nearly zero CO 2 emissions.  
In the area of steel research, major effort s are dedicated to th e development of high-
strength steels (HSS). In the automotive industr y, for instance, HSS allow car weights to 
be reduced through thinner sh eet which ultimately results in reductions in fuel 
consumption and CO 2 emissions. In this context, the project EAF-PROMS delivered 
promising results on suitable technologies for the production of ultra-performing steel 
grades in electric arc furnaces (EAF), dis posing of extremely improved properties for 
light-weight constructions. 
With a view to improving safety conditions for workers in European coal mines, the 
RFCS funding the EMTECH project, which started in 2008, and which focuses on 
                                                 
93 Council Decision 2008/376/EC of 29 April 2008 
 
EN 48   EN developing emergency support systems and tec hnologies that ensure the survival and 
rescue of mine workers in the ev ent of severe mine incidents.  
The IAMTECH project, finally, provided re sults for increasing the productivity of 
modern European high-performance coal mines through advanced information and 
communication technologies. The results of this project were published in 2008 and 
helped to improve maintenance operations in coal mines. The participation of a partner 
from Poland, the biggest hard coal producing country in the European Union, ensures the transferability of the results  throughout the new Member States. It is worth mentioning 
that the results obtained led to technology which won the 2008 Innovation Prize, awarded 
by one of the participating partner's company. 
2. D
EVELOPMENTS IN MEMBER STATES AND APPLICATION OF THE OPEN 
METHOD OF COORDINATION  
2.1. The Open Method of Coordination in support of reaching the 3 % objective 
In the field of R&D, the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) was set-up following the 
adoption of the Barcelona 3% objective and the subsequent 3% action plan, where the 
OMC was identified as an important tool to help raise the EU's R&D intensity to 
approach 3 % GDP by 2010. The Scientific an d Technical Research Committee of the 
EU (CREST) was asked in 2003 to act as the operational interface to define and oversee 
the implementation of OMC. Following the positi ve results of the first three OMC cycles 
(2003-2007), CREST launched a fourth OMC cy cle in December 2007. The following 
topics were discussed: univer sities, industry-led competence centres, internationalisation 
of R&D, and policy mix peer reviews94 
– Universities 
The CREST working group on "Approaches to improve the excellence of 
research in universities" carried out its work between February 2008 and March 
2009 and produced a final report that was adopted by CREST in early April 
2009. The report includes nine main recomm endations grouped into three areas: 
strategic orientation of po licies to promote research excellence, instruments to 
improve research excellence and further developments to strengthen mutual 
learning. The report also contains relevant  findings on important issues such as a 
typology of strategies used by Member  States, a comparison of existing 
instruments, an analysis of factors affecting research quality or funding 
allocation methods. A list of good pr actices has also been included. 
– Industry-Led competence centres 
The CREST working group on Industry-Led Competence Centres carried out its 
work between February and Septembe r 2008. A survey of Member States' 
activities in the area was carried out and supplemented by information from an 
ongoing ERA-NET project (COMPERA). The final report, which was presented 
to CREST in December 2008, presents Member States' approaches to the key 
                                                 
94 The different reports are available at http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-
research/coordination/coordination01_en.htm  
 
EN 49   EN aspects of establishing and the functio ning of industry-led competence centres, 
including good practices related to governance, metrics and performance 
indicators, financing and sustainability, training and mobility of researchers as well as recommendations for further work in this area. 
– Internationalisation of R&D 
In 2008, the CREST working group on "Inter nationalisation of R&D" was in its 
second cycle. A key element of the work of the group was to identify good cooperation practice and to systematically  develop options for cooperation with 
Brazil, India, and Russia. A comparative analysis of Member States' and Associated Countries' cooperation with  these countries was drawn up and 
additional empirical information about  cooperation patte rns and bilateral 
agreements was gathered. Mutual learning exercises were also pursued on topics 
such as the possible association of Ru ssia to FP7 or the synergies between 
activities at national and Community le vel. The group's report was adopted by 
CREST in April 2009.  
– Policy mix peer reviews 
The policy mixes of Bulgaria and Aust ria were reviewed in 2008. The peer 
review in Bulgaria took place on 2-4 J une 2008 in Sofia, and a feedback mission 
was organised on 10 November 2008. The results from the peer review are being used in the drafting of the new Bulgarian R&D strategy. The peer review 
in Austria took place on 19-23 May 2008 in Vienna and Graz. The review team 
gave its assessment at the feedback mission in Alpbach on 19-21 August 2008 at 
a dedicated evening of the final event of  the Austrian Research Dialogue. The 
recommendations of the peer review t eam together with the outcome of the 
Austrian Research Dialogue and the resu lts of the system evaluation will form 
the basis for developing a new strategic vision. 
 
EN 50   EN 2.2. Trends in public and private research investment95 
2.2.1. Progress towards the 3 % objective 
 
Source:  DG Research                                                                    
Data:  Eurostat, OECD
Notes:  (1) KR: (i) There is a break in series between 2007 and the previous years.
                           (ii) R& D in the social sciences and humanities is not included.
             (2) US: GERD does not include most or all capital expenditure.
             (3) CN: Hong Kong is not included.JP
KR (1)
US (2)
EU-27
CN (3)
0,00,51,01,52,02,53,03,54,0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007R&D intensity
 
Figure 1 : Evolution in R&D intensity 2000-2007 
It can be seen from Figure 1 that the EU R& D intensity did not change significantly over 
the period 2000-2007, whereas the US R&D intens ity declined slightly, but from a higher 
level. However, the increase in R&D expenditu re in real terms was substantial and higher 
in EU-27 than in the US (19.6% compared  to 14.8%), and the stagnation in EU R&D 
intensity is explained by a corresponding incr ease in EU GDP. In comparison, Japan has 
outperformed both EU-27 and the US, increas ing R&D expenditure by 21.9% in real 
terms and R&D intensity by 11.5% in the same  period. Starting at a level of 2.4% in 
2000, the R&D intensity of South Korea ha d reached 3.23% in 2006, almost the same 
level as Japan. The R&D intensity of Chin a has grown by more than 50% since 2000, 
driven by the business enterprise sector, which financed R&D at a leve l of almost 1% of 
                                                 
95 R&D is funded from four sources : national business enterprise (private sector), national 
government, other national sources and abroad. 
 
EN 51   EN GDP in 2006 (the same level as EU-27). Therefore, in 2006 EU-27 R&D intensity was 
only higher than that of China becau se of higher public funding of R&D. 
The stability of R&D intensity at the over all EU level hides a much more diverse 
development at the level of Member States. In  particular, R&D intensity has increased in 
17 Member States over the period 2000-2007: 
Three of the new Member States (Estonia, C yprus and Latvia, representing about 0.4% of 
EU-27 GDP in 2007) have managed to increase  their R&D intensities by more than 50%, 
but from a relatively low level.  
Nine Member States (Lithuania, Spain, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Ireland, Czech 
Republic, Slovenia and Portugal, represen ting about 16.5% of EU-27 GDP) have had 
R&D intensity increases of between 10% a nd 50%. With the exception of Austria, the 
growth for all of these Member States is fr om a relatively low level of R&D intensity.  
Five Member States (Denmark, Italy, Malta , Germany and Finland), representing about 
36% of EU-27 GDP, have increased th eir R&D intensities by up to 10%. 
On the other hand, ten Member States (rep resenting about 47.1% of EU-27 GDP) have 
seen their R&D intensities  decrease over the period 2000-2007 (Belgium, Bulgaria, 
Greece, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands Poland, Slovakia, Sweden, United Kingdom).  
In sum, R&D expenditure has grown in real  terms in all EU Member States over 2000-
2007, but with the exception of Austria, subs tantial increases in R&D intensity have 
almost exclusively taken place in countries wi th lower R&D intensities. Therefore, EU-
27 progress towards higher levels of R&D in tensity has mainly been the result of 
countries with low R&D intensit ies catching up in the period 2000-2007. 
Since 2005, except for Bulgaria, each Member  State has set a na tional R&D intensity 
target. The national targets ma y differ from the overall 3% target for the EU, depending 
on the particular situation of each Me mber State regarding R&D expenditure. 
The grey part of the bars in Figure 2 show  for each Member State the difference between 
its R&D intensity for the latest available year
96 and its R&D intensity in 2000. For 
instance, R&D intensity in Austria was 0.74 pe rcentage points high er in 2008 (at 2.65%, 
shown in brackets on the gra ph) than in 2000 (at 1.91%). 
The blue bars show for each Member State the distance separating its latest97 R&D 
intensity value and its R&D intensity target  for 2010. Austria's R&D intensity target for 
2010 of 3% is 0.35 percentage points higher than its 2007 R&D intensity of 2.65%. In 
other words, in the period 2000-2007, Austria has progressed about two thirds of the distance towards its 2010 target . Austria has, of all Member States, achieved the most 
substantial progress.  
In ten Member States R&D intensity was hi gher in 2000 than in 2007 or the latest 
available year. These Member States are therefore further away from their national R&D 
intensity than in 2000. In most Member Stat es the progress made  towards national R&D 
intensity targets is only a small part of the pr ogress that is required to meet their national 
                                                
 
96 This is 2006, 2007 or 2008, see note to table 2. 
97 Idem. 
 
EN 52   EN investment objective, and for many Member St ates it will be a challenge to reach the 
targets they have set for themselves.  
Source : DG Research
Data: Eurostat, Member States
Notes: (1) IT, PL, UK: 2006; EE, IE, AT, FI: 2008.
             (2) IT, PL, UK: 2000-2006; EE, IE, AT, FI: 2000-2008; EL: 2001-2007; FR, HU, MT: 2004-2007; SE : 2005-2007.
             (3) IT, PL: 2006-2010; UK : 2006-2014; FR: 2007-2012; EL : 2007-2015; EE, IE, AT: 2008-2010; FI: 2008-2011.             (4) IE: The R&D intensity target for 2010 was estimated by DG Research.             (5) BG has not set an R&D intensity target.-0,4 -0,2 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8EU-27  (1.85)Slovakia  (0.46) Sweden  (3.64) Netherlands  (1.70) Belgium  (1.87) Poland  (0.56)  France  (2.08)UK  (1.76) Bulgaria (5)  (0.48)Luxembourg  (1.63) Greece  (0.57) Finland  (3.39) Malta  (0.60) Germany   (2.53) Hungary  (0.97) Italy  (1.14) Slovenia  (1.53) Latvia  (0.59) Romania  (0.53) Cyprus  (0.45) Lithuania  (0.82) Denmark  (2.55)Ireland (4)  (1.44) Czech Republic  (1.54) Spain  (1.27)Portugal  (1.18)  Estonia  (1.24)Austria  (2.65) 
Percentage pointsProgress made 2000-2007 (2) Progress to be made 2007-2010 (3)
 
Figure 2 : R&D intensity - progress towards the 2010 targets (in percentage points); in 
brackets : R&D intensity, 2007 (1) 
2.2.2. Trends in public funding 
R&D financed by the government as a percen tage of GDP in EU-27 was equal to 0.63% 
in 2005, against 0.64% in 2000. This figure do es not include Community funds and 
foregone revenue from tax incentives. Adding Community funds and foregone tax 
revenue would bring the government funding of  R&D closer to the level of the US 
(0.76% in 2006).  
The stability of public funding at the overa ll EU level hides a more positive dynamic 
picture at Member State level. Figure 3 s hows the respective cont ributions of funding by 
 
EN 53   EN each national government98 and funding by the business en terprise sector to the 
development of R&D intensity. Fourteen Member States have increased direct 
government support for R&D (R&D financed by government as a percentage of GDP) 
over the period 2000-200799. The intensity of government direct support for R&D has 
increased not only in those countries where it was low, but also in some of the Member 
States where it was already quite high. A slight decrease was observed in Germany and France and a limited increase in  the United Kingdom and Italy. The fact that these four 
Member States account for a large share of  the total government budget for R&D in EU-
27 explains the stability observed at EU level. 
It should be noted that in recent years a number of Member States have introduced or 
reinforced indirect public support for R&D, in particular for bus iness R&D through tax 
incentives
100, as a complement to direct support and notably with a view to raising 
private-sector investments in R&D. This  increased indirect support for R&D by 
government is another indication of th e commitment to achieving higher R&D 
intensities. The foregone tax revenue of su ch measures is not accounted for as public 
expenditure and is not include d in the data in Figure 3. 
2.2.3. Trends in private funding 
At EU level, the business sector finances  about 55% of R&D expenditure. With the 
addition of the share of business sector funding from abroad101, the business sector 
probably finances more than 60% of R&D expenditure in EU-27. However, the exact 
share of business sector funding from abroad is not known.  
In EU-27, R&D financed by business enterprise was 1% of GDP in 2005, compared to 
1.05 % GDP in 2000. This intensity  of R&D funding by business enterprises in the EU in 
2005 represented 38%, 41% and 59% of the co rresponding values for Japan, South Korea 
and the US respectively. Even if business R&D funding from the ‘abroad’ source of 
funds were added to R&D financed by busin ess enterprise, the conclusion would not 
change significantly: the difference in total R&D intensity between the EU and the US, 
Japan and South Korea is almost exclusively due  to the difference in the level of private 
funding of R&D. In this respect, it is noted that R&D financed by business enterprise as a 
percentage of GDP increased  substantially in Japan a nd South Korea between 2000 and 
2006. It decreased in the US by 12% over the same period, but from a much higher level 
than the EU. 
In 2006, business expenditure on R&D (BERD) amounted to EUR 136 billion in EU-27, 
compared to EUR 193 billion in the US and EUR 91 billion in Japan. In the seven-year period 2000-2006, total BERD in EU-27 amounted to EUR 852 billion in current prices,  
                                                
 
98 GERD financed by government only includes direct support for R&D by government. Indirect 
government support for business R&D through tax incentives is not considered a government 
source of funds. Therefore, any increase of a government's indirect support for R&D over the 
period 2000-2006 is not represented in Figure 3.  
99 See the actual period covered for each Member State, depending on data availability, in the 
footnote to Figure 3. 
100 This shift towards indirect public support of R&D is documented in Key Figures 2007, pp 73-75. 
101 R&D financed by ‘abroad’ amounted to 0.16% of GDP for the EU in 2005, including public and 
private foreign sources. Funding from the abroad-private source of funds, although not known precisely, is therefore equal to or less than 0.16 % of GDP. This compares to 1% of GDP for the 
(domestic) business enterprise source of funds. 
 
EN 54   EN Source:  DG Research                                                                   
Data:  Eurostat
Note:  (1) NL: 2000-2003; BE, LU, PT, EU-27: 2000-2005; BG, DE, IE, ES, CY, PL, UK: 2000-2006; AT: 2000-2008; 
                SE: 2001-2003; DK, EL: 2001-2005;  FR: 2004-2006; HU: 2004-2007; IT: 2005-2006; MT: 2006-2007ITNL
EU-27DK EL
FI
DEBELVCY
EE
HU PTSI
BG
PLSKSELU
RO
MTIEES
CZAT
UKLT
FR
-20-15-10-505101520
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
GERD financed by business enterprise as  % of GDP - average annual growth (%)GERD financed by government as % of  GDP - average annual growth (%)
 
Figure 3 : GERD financed by business enterprise and by government as % of GDP - 
average annual growth 2000-2007 (1) 
compared to EUR 1366 and EUR 675 billion in  the US and Japan respectively. As a 
result, the business sector in the US invest ed a total of EUR 514 billion more in R&D 
than was invested by the business se ctor in EU-27 in the period 2000-2006102. 
The intensity of business enterprise support for R&D increased significantly almost 
exclusively in those ERA countries where this intensity was quite low, with the 
exceptions of Austria. Therefore in the ERA,  any increase in business enterprise funding 
of R&D has basically been linked to the cat ching-up process of Member States starting 
from a low level. 
                                                 
102 Source: Eurostat, OECD  
 
EN 55   EN 2.2.4. To sum up  
Funding of R&D at EU level has increased significantly in re al terms, but it has been 
stable as a percentage of GDP . However, this stability at the overall EU level hides a 
more dynamic picture at the level of the Me mber States, where a majority of Member 
States have managed to increase both th eir private and public funding of R&D. 
Nevertheless, this has not been sufficien t to increase overall EU R&D funding, since 
most of the countries having increased are in a catching-up proce ss and do not have a 
very high weight in terms of share of GDP an d in terms of share of R&D investment in 
the EU. 
2.3. Trends in research policies 
2.3.1. Improving the policy mix for R&D Member States have continued to work throughout 2008 on optimising the mix of policy 
measures they put in place to stimulate publ ic and private R&D. National policies have 
since the launch of the Lisbon Strategy in 2000 evolved towards gr eater consistency and 
complexity and are increasingly developed with  a view of maximisi ng the contribution of 
research to solving the economic and societal  challenges Europe is faced with in the 
years to come. 
Many Member States have over the past years developed multi-annual strategies for 
stimulating R&D and innovation activity, in  many cases including also multi-annual 
budget plans. Some Member States have in 2008 put in place a multi-annual strategy or 
are still developing one. The French mini ster for research recently announced the 
government's willingness to develop a new national strategy for research and innovation 
policy on the basis of a large stakeholder consultation. The government of the Czech 
Republic approved a reform of the system  of research, development and innovation, 
including a significant reduction in the number of funding bodies, supporting the 
excellence of public R&D and ensuring its use, promoting increased human resources for 
R&D and a stronger focus on internationalisation of R&D activities. In Bulgaria, a 
strategy for R&D and innovation is still unde r discussion. Norway has also announced 
the publication of a new White Paper on research. 
In other Member States reviews of existing st rategies have been carried out with a view 
to further optimising the policy mix. The Austrian government launched a 'Research 
dialogue' to discuss the upcoming challenges and define a renewed strategy for Austrian 
research policy with its stakeholders. Bo th the Flemish and the Walloon region in 
Belgium have, in preparing for upcoming elec tions and the next pol icy cycle, recently 
concluded reviews of their policy mixes. 
There is a consistent trend to broaden strate gies to make them cut across the competences 
of different ministries. Most often clear links are establishe d between research policy and 
innovation policy, but other policy domains are al so taken into account, such as industrial 
policy, education policy or fiscal policy. In  2008, the UK supplemented its 'Science and 
Innovation Investment Framework 2004-2014' with the 'Innovation Nation White Paper', 
which focuses strongly on a demand driven approach to stimulating innovation activity. 
In the Netherlands, a long term and comp rehensive 'Agenda for durable productivity 
growth' was published, laying down the ambitio ns and objectives for 2030. In Finland, a 
new national innovation strategy was launched,  aiming at creating a broad-based and 
multi-faceted innovation policy and strengthening its implementation. 
 
EN 56   EN Changes in the institutional settings used fo r R&D policy development are continuing to 
be introduced. This concerns mainly merger s or re-organisations  between ministries 
dealing with research, educa tion, employment, trade and i ndustry. For example, in 2008 
Belgium's Walloon region create d a Directorate-General fo r Economy, Employment and 
Research, which deals with a variety of po licies related to competitiveness. The Czech 
Republic is currently discussing a rationali sation of its funding bodies. In Malta, the 
portfolio for science, research, innovati on and technology policy was shifted from the 
Office of the Prime Minister to the Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs. In Spain, a 
new ministry for science and i nnovation was created, responsibl e for nearly all of public 
R&D and innovation related policies. 
2.3.2. Responding to the crisis  
As a response to the financial and economic crisis, Member States have put in place 
economic recovery packages. The Commi ssion has adopted in November 2008 a 
European Economic Recovery Plan103, in which it notably called upon Member States to 
continue to increase their public  investments in R&D, in line with their national intensity 
targets. Member States were also reminde d of the importance of continuing with the 
structural policy reform needed to make Eu rope take advantage of the next upturn.  
In their recovery packages, many Member Stat es have attached great importance to R&D 
and innovation. For example, the Irish government has in December 2008 published a new policy framework document on "Build ing Ireland’s Smart Economy: A Framework 
for Sustainable Economic Renewal". The document sets out the government’s vision for the next phase of Ireland’s economic developm ent and seeks to addr ess the problems of 
restoring stability both to the public financ es and to Ireland’s competitiveness. Key 
elements of the framework document include investing in research and development, 
encouraging multinational companies to lo cate more R&D capacity in Ireland and 
ensuring the commercialisation and retention of  ideas that flow from this investment. 
With public and private budgets tightening, inve stments in R&D are threatened. In a few 
of the hardest hit countries, and notably in Latvia and Romania, public budgets are 
expected to be cut significantly. In contrast, many Member States have in their recovery 
packages adhered to th eir public investment targets. Finl and, for instance, has restated its 
objective of increasing R&D intensity up to 4% GDP. Sweden has also announced 
significantly increased public budgets for R&D.  The Slovenian government has indicated 
that despite the crisis, the allocation of  public funds for R&D will be increased by 
approximately 0.1 to 0.3% GDP annually. Ge rmany has decided to focus additional 
funding on SMEs and the development of hybrid and other clean  car technologies. 
As direct relief to the private sector, ma ny Member States are opting to strengthen 
existing R&D tax incentives. In France, the modalities of the 'Crédit d'impôt recherche' have been temporarily modified to increase  the generosity of the scheme. Portugal has 
decided to increase the rate of its tax cred it. Both Belgium and the Netherlands have 
decided to strengthen their existing fiscal incentives schemes. In Ireland, enhancements 
to the R&D tax credit have been announced as this instrument is viewed as a key incentive to attract multi national R&D investment. 
                                                
 
103 COM(2008) 800  
 
EN 57   EN 2.3.3. Fostering structural change through the development of high-tech sectors 
The objective to develop high-tech sectors and support high-tech SMEs took a growing 
importance in 2008. It is to be noted in this context that the Commission launched in the 
context of its recovery plan three public-p rivate partnerships on green cars, energy-
efficient buildings and factories of the futu re. The Commission also recommended to the 
Member States to cut by 75% the fees fo r patent applications and maintenance. 
Almost all Member States focus on developi ng high-tech sectors in  their economy, even 
though the approach they take towards this challenge varies considerably. In many 
Member States, scientific domains or industr ial sectors have been identified which are 
deemed of strategic importa nce to the country's economy and where support is to be 
concentrated. A recent example is the a doption by the Luxemburg government of eight 
future priorities for public research. 
Concentrating public support on priority ar eas can follow a variety of routes. A 
traditional approach consists of setting up thematic research programmes in which companies and public research institutes typi cally cooperate. Quite a few Member States 
have over the past years cha nnelled their dedicated funding through clustering initiatives. 
France is continuing this approach by launc hing the second phase of the competitiveness 
cluster policy for a further three years peri od (2009-2011) with a to tal budget of EUR 1,5 
billion. Creating dedicated thematic research  institutes and providing specific support to 
New Technology Based Firms (NTBF) are othe r options that have been chosen by 
Member States over the past years. In this respect, the new Irish policy document 
mentioned above states that up to EUR 500 mi llion will be generated over the period 
2009–2013 to create a venture fund, known as  ‘Innovation Fund – Ireland’ to support 
early stage R&D-intensive SMEs. 
A novel approach that is gaining ground in some Member States is one whereby the 
concentration of resources is not based on de lineation of research domains or industrial 
sectors, but on the basis of societal challe nges. In the UK, the Technology Strategy Board 
has recently announced the launch of additional Innovation Platforms on issues such as low carbon vehicles, assisted living or low impact buildin gs. The Netherlands has in 
2008 launched societal innovation agendas on them es such as energy, health and water. 
Although the issue of structural change to wards a larger high tech content in the 
economy is important, the tendency is sometimes  to put all efforts on the development of 
high-tech sectors to the detriment of i nnovation in traditional low technology sectors 
which make up the bulk of the economy in mo st Member States. Due account should be 
taken of these traditional sectors where grow th potential is hampered by low levels of 
innovation. It is important to note in this respect that the innovation voucher schemes, 
piloted by the Netherlands some years ago, ar e continuing to spread across Europe. The 
scheme aims at bringing SMEs in contact with knowledge institutes by issuing vouchers of relatively small nominal value (typically a few thousand euro) to pay for an innovation 
solution to a problem faced by the SME. Th e main purpose of an innovation voucher 
scheme is to bring a maximum number of SMEs into contact for the first time with a knowledge institute. Slovakia and the UK are among the Member States which have introduced the scheme in 2008. 
 
EN 58   EN 2.3.4. Increasing the quality of the public research base 
Increasing the quality and efficiency of the pub lic research base is broadly recognised by 
Member States as an essential factor in a ttracting private investments in R&D. It is 
therefore not surprising that this continues to  be a key aspect of R&D policy reform in 
many Member States. It should be noted, however, that there are significant differences 
in the stage of development amongst the Memb er States and in particular between old 
and new Member States. In many of the East ern European countries, the public research 
base still largely consists of independent re search institutes (Academy of Sciences), for 
which reforms have started, although in some cases drastic reforms of institutional set-up and funding streams are still re quired. For the old Member Stat es, the challenge is rather 
connected to coping with the in creasing globalisation of R&D a nd the need to ensure that 
public research performed in their respectiv e countries is capable of competing on a 
world scale. 
In the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Edu cation, Youth and Sports  published the first 
draft of a White Book which outlines the ma in directions of reforming the Czech 
universities. The White Book aims at stre ngthening R&D performed at universities by 
differentiating between teaching and research universities, concentrating resources on a 
limited number of research centres, strength ening the third mission of universities and 
professionalising management. The Finnish  public research system is undergoing 
restructuring through the establishment of ne w higher education institutes, mainly as a 
result of mergers. In France, the public research institutes CNRS and INSERM were 
restructured into thematic institutes and a 'Plan Campus' was launched to create university excellence clusters of international level. The Polish government adopted new 
acts on the Polish Academy of Sciences and on Research Institutes and in Portugal a Law on the Higher Education System was adopted. In Greece and Malta, a restructuring and modernisation of the public re search system was announced. 
2.3.5. The ERA dimension in national policies 
The coordination of national programmes has b een an important element of the European 
Research Area initiative since its launch in 2000. In 2008, instruments offered by the 
Framework Programme are still the main tools used for ensu ring cooperation and 
coordination between Member States and thei r researchers, both at  the programme and 
project level. Many Member St ates have put in place specifi c measures to stimulate the 
participation of their researchers in the Framework Programme. A recent example is the 
setting up of a specific structure by the Portuguese government to encourage the 
participation of Portuguese organisations in FP7. 
As many national governments continue to be  hesitant to let pub lic money flow over 
national borders, progress in opening up na tional research programmes remains limited. 
There are, however, a number of examples where some Member States are reinforcing 
their cooperation. The Nordic countries have , for instance, announced that they will 
invest jointly in six research programmes to achieve a global leading position in environmental technology and climate change . France and Germany have also developed 
cooperative projects on fields such as: materials, aeronautics, space, oceanography, 
medical research, transporta tion, and vegetal genomics, microelectronics and laser 
techniques. In this context, common research  projects have been launched or researchers 
are being exchanged between research labs . A research unit of the French National 
 
EN 59   EN Institute for Health Medical Research (INRA) has also been created within the German 
Cancer Research Centre in Heidelberg. 
Another interesting example of transnational cooperation is the creation of a joint 
nanotechnology institute between Portugal an d Spain. The INL (International Iberian 
Nanotechnology Laboratory) will be  the first fully in ternational research  organization in 
Europe in the field of nanoscience a nd nanotechnology. The new laboratory is being 
established by Portugal and Spain, but in the fu ture it will be open to the membership of 
other countries of Europe a nd other regions of the world. 
Many Member States, and typical ly the old Member States, ha ve in recent years started 
to develop schemes to attract top researchers from abroad, as an additional way to strengthen their national systems. In Ju ly 2008, the Dutch Cabinet presented its new 
blueprint for a modern migration policy, with  one of the objectives being to remove 
barriers for knowledge migrants. In France, effort s have been made in the past couple of 
years in order to attract fore ign researchers. The most im portant scheme corresponds to 
fellowships granted by the National Agency fo r Research for forei gn researchers, through 
a programme called “Chairs of Excellence”. Portugal has recently launched an instrument called the Invited Chairs progr amme. This programme aims to attract 
international high level researchers in order stimulate the internationalization of Portuguese Universities. In Malta, the Immigration Act was amended to introduce new 
regulations on the admitta nce of third country nationals fo r scientific rese arch purposes. 
In this respect, it is also worth noting that  a study will be launched in 2010 to assess the 
implementation of Counc il Directive 2005/71/EC
104 and of Recommendation 
2005/761/EC105 of the European Parliament and the Council, both elements of the 
'Scientific Visa Package'.  
All Member States are actively following an d participating in the activities of the 
European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructures and are in some cases 
complementing them with work on developing national roadmaps or by reserving 
national funding for participation in ESFRI pr ojects. In Greece, the General Secretariat 
for Research and Technology has launched a f easibility study to decide  on which projects 
it will participate in. The Czech government has approved a national roadmap for large 
research infrastructure support up to 2015 an d foresees to use si gnificant financial 
resources from the Structural Funds. In Ire land, national planning for the provision of 
research infrastructures is undertaken with direct reference to the ESFRI roadmap and 
Ireland will make decisions rega rding its formal membership status of the different pan-
European infrastructure projec ts (including but not limited to the list above) as and when 
they move towards the actual construction/im plementation phase. In the Netherlands, an 
expert commission was established to advise  the government on Dutch participation in 
ESFRI projects. 
                                                 
104 Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-
country nationals for the purposes of scientific research 
105 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 September 2005 to 
facilitate the issue by the Member States of uni form short-stay visas for researchers from third 
countries travelling within the Community for th e purpose of carrying out scientific research 
 
EN 60   EN The Science, Technology and Comp etitiveness Key Figures Report106, published at the 
beginning of 2009, noted encouraging progress in establishing the European Research 
Area, although further progress is needed for Europe to realise its ambitions. 
3. I NTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGREEMENTS  
Integrating Europe's neighbours into the ERA,  fostering strategic cooperation with key 
third countries and improving the framework conditions for cooperation will enhance the 
international dimension of the ERA. In th is context, the existing 16 S&T cooperation 
agreements with third partner countries provi de a continuing platform for improving and 
coordinating research cooperation. 
Developments in 2008 includ e notably the conclusion of  the already provisionally 
applicable S&T cooperation ag reement with Egypt, the sign ature of an S&T cooperation 
agreement with New Zealand and the authoris ation to launch negotiations of an S&T 
cooperation agreement with Jordan (EC). Furthermore, the already provisionally 
applicable association agreements with Switzerland (EC and Euratom) and Israel (EC) were concluded and entered into force. 
In the context of the Euratom Treaty, there ar e agreements with the following emerging 
countries: Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbe kistan and Argentina. Agreements with 
China, India and Brazil are under negotiation. 
The conclusion of association instruments fac ilitates the integration process of European 
partners as well as candidate  and potential candidate coun tries into the ERA. In 2008, 
FP7 EC association instruments were signe d with Bosnia-Herzegovi na and Montenegro. 
Researchers from 39 states are now enjoyi ng the same rights and obligations in their 
participation in FP7 research projects. 
4. C
ONSULTATION AND MONITORING PROCEDURES  
4.1. Scientific and Technical Research Committee (CREST) 
In 2008 CREST held six meetings. The Commi ssion regularly kept CREST informed of 
new policy initiatives and the presidencies informed CREST of the work in the Council. 
One meeting took place at Directors-Gene ral level, which was devoted to the 
implementation of the ERA initiatives and the development of a vision and governance for the ERA ('Ljubljana process'). 
The Commission informed CRES T on a regular basis of the ERA initiatives, including 
specific presentations of the Commission pr oposal for a Council regulation on the 
Community legal framework for European Re search Infrastructur es, the Communication 
'Towards Joint Programming in Research ' and the Communication on a Strategic 
European Framework for Internationa l Science and Technology Cooperation. 
                                                
 
106 The document is available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/e ra/pdf/key-figures-report2008-
2009_en.pdf  
 
EN 61   EN Within the context of the Open Method of Co-ordination, CREST discussed and adopted 
recommendations of the working groups on industry-led competen ce centres, R&D in 
services and policy mix peer reviews for Austria and Bulgaria. The Committee also discussed the main recommendations of the working group on internationalisation of 
R&D. Furthermore, CREST undertook a mutual  learning exercise on the basis of the 
National Reform Programmes and the 2008 Progress reports. 
CREST decided to invite Albania, th e Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 
(FYROM), Montenegro and Serbia as observers to the Committee. 
Presentations and exchanges of view s also covered the following topics: 
– Realising the fifth freedom; 
– Family-friendly scientific careers; 
– Follow-up of the Implementation of Council Conclusions on the Commission 
Communication "Scientific Information in the Digital Age: Access, Dissemination 
and Preservation"; 
– Science and research policies in Slovenia and in France. 
4.2. Programme committees 
The Programme Committees fo r the FP7 Specific Programme s 'Cooperation', 'Ideas', 
'People' and 'Capacities' held 82 meetings in 2008. They were asked for 195 opinions by 
the Commission, both on the wo rk programmes that allow publication of calls for 
proposals and on the selection of proposals. All the opini ons given were favourable.  
The Consultative Committee for the FP7 Sp ecific Programme under the Euratom Treaty 
met 7 times and gave 61 favourable opinions/recommendations.  
The Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) met twice during 2008. 
A new committee, the "Coal and Steel Comm ittee", was created in 2008 by the Council 
Decision of 29 April 2008 on the adoption of the Research Programme of the Research Fund for Coal and Steel and on the multiannual technical guidelines for this programme. 
It did not meet in 2008. 
As in the past, the colla boration between the Commission and the Committees was very 
good and it entailed many positive and constructive exchanges.  
4.3. Advisory groups 
In continuity with the method followed duri ng FP6, Advisory Groups were created by the 
Commission, with the mandate to provide co nsistent and consolid ated advice on the 
scientific and techni cal content of the annual Work  Programmes under FP7. Advisory 
Groups' advice is meant to complement other so urces of external advi ce received by the 
Commission, including from stakeholder co nsultations and, where relevant, from 
European Technology Platforms.  
The separate Advisory Groups for 'Regions  of knowledge' and 'R esearch Potential' 
created at the beginni ng of FP7 have now been merged into one new Advisory Group for 
 
EN 62   EN 'Regional aspects of FP7'. The 'Science in society' Advisory Group has been replaced by 
focused workshops. 
As a result, the different themes or parts of the FP7 Specific Programmes are currently 
covered by fourteen Advisory Groups: Hea lth; Food, agriculture and biotechnologies; 
Information and communication technolo gies; Nanosciences, nanotechnologies, 
materials and new production technologies ; non nuclear Energy and Euratom; 
Environment (including climate change); Transport (including aeronautics); Socio 
economic sciences and Humanities; Space; Security; People; Research for SMEs; Regional aspects of FP7; Activities  of international co-operation. 
In autumn 2008, the memberships and mandates of most of the Advisory Groups have 
been reviewed.  
Selection of the members of Advisory  Groups follows the Commission guidelines
107, and 
is done on the basis of excelle nce, independence and pluralis m. Efforts are also being 
made to ensure an appropriate balance a nd diversity in membership of the groups, 
concerning notably gender, geography, and ty pes of organisations. The mandates of the 
groups are based on those used in FP6, but have  been broadened in order to reflect the 
wider scope of FP7.  
The emphasis on transparency has continue d. The memberships, mandates and written 
advice of Advisory Groups are publicly available on the Commission Website at the 
following address: http://ec.eur opa.eu/research/fp7/advisory_en.html .  
4.4. European Research Area Board (ERAB) 
The European Research Area Board (ERAB)  was legally establ ished by Commission 
decision on 7 December 2007108. In order to ensure the transparency of the procedure to 
nominate ERAB members, an independe nt Identification Committee (ICD) was 
established, which reported to the Commi ssion in spring 2008. The nomination process 
was completed in April 2008, when 22 high-leve l members were appointed in a personal 
capacity by Commissioner Potocnik, for terms of office lasting four years and with the 
possibility of one renewal. At its first plenary meeting in June 2008, the members of ERAB elected a Bureau consisting of the Chair, Prof. John Wood, two Vice-Chairs and 
three 'Bureau partners', to act as a steering committee for ERAB. 
As its name implies, ERAB's work focuses on the realisation of the European Research 
Area. According to the Commission Decisi on of 7 December 2007, ERAB's tasks are: 
(a) to advise the Commission on the real isation of a European Research Area; 
(b) to deliver opinions on the realisatio n of a European Research Area at the 
request of the Commission or on the Board's own initiative; 
(c) to provide the Commission with an annual report on the current state of 
the European Research Area. 
                                                
 
107 COM (2002) 713 "Communication on the collection and use of expertise by the Commission: 
principles and guidelines" 
108 Commission Decision 2008/111/EC , Euratom of 7 December 2007 
 
EN 63   EN ERAB aims to deliver by June  2009 its first Annua l Report, in the fo rm of a long-term 
Strategic View (2030) on the ERA. Prepara tion of this Strategic View began in 2008 
with discussion focused on five key issues  (in separate working groups): Modern 
Universities and Research Organisations; Favourable conditions for Europe/innovation; 
Science's responses to major societal chal lenges; the Fifth Freedom; and international 
cooperation. 'Excellence' is treat ed as a transversal issue.  
ERAB held three plenary meetings and three Bureau meetings in 2008. 
4.5. Monitoring and evaluation 
The main monitoring and eval uation activities in 2008 incl uded the completion of the 
first Monitoring Report under the seventh Framework Programmes and the ex post evaluation of the 6
th Framework Programmes, according to the commitments made at the 
launch of FP7 to update a nd develop Community resear ch evaluation activities. 
The FP7 Monitoring Report is based largely on a set of indicators which were identified 
through discussions between Commission se rvices. The aim is  to provide a 
comprehensive picture of implementation and performance, highlighting in particular the 
issues of interest to programme management , and provide a base of information which 
can be developed year-on-year  to support future FP evaluation exercise s. The Monitoring 
Report also contains information on progre ss with the novelties introduced under FP7, 
such as the European Research Council (E RC), Risk Sharing Finance Facility (RSFF) 
and Joint Technology Initiat ives (JTI). The Monitoring Report is available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/research/repor ts/2009/pdf/first_f p7_monitoring_en.pdf  
The ex post evaluation of FP6 was carried out  by a group of 13 independent experts and 
supported by an extensive collection of evaluation evidence in cluding studies on 
particular FP6 thematic research areas; stud ies of horizontal issues such as networking 
and publications performance; impact studie s of the FP by the Member States; analyses 
of key issues by evaluation experts; self -assessments by Commission services; and a 
survey of the National Contact Po ints. The report is available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/research/reports /2009/pdf/fp6_evaluation_final_report_en.pdf .  
In an exercise related to the work on eval uation, a four member group of independent 
experts produced a review on 'The Future of  Networks of Excellence'. The report is 
available at http://ec.europa .eu/research/reports/2008/pdf/e xpert-group-on-the-future-of-
noes_final-report.pdf .  
Amongst other activities durin g the year was the re-lau nch of the European RTD 
Evaluation Network, run by th e Commission and including members from Member 
States and Associated States, to excha nge information and build good practice on 
research evaluation in Europe. 
5. S TATISTICAL TABLES ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 7TH FRAMEWORK 
PROGRAMME  
5.1. Explanatory notes 
The presented data refer to i) proposals subm itted in response to FP7 calls for proposals 
the processing of which ended during 2008, ii) FP7 proposals retained for funding 
 
EN 64   EN following proposal evaluation and selection a nd iii) FP7 grant agreements signed during 
2008. 
In reading the provided tabl es please note the following: 
The tables are based on data from 55 FP7 co ncluded calls for propos als, i.e. calls for 
proposals the processing of which ended in  2008 and for which evaluation and selection 
outcomes are available.The list of the FP7 ca lls for proposals is presented in table 1. 
In the group ‘Candidate and Associated Countries’, Croatia and Turkey are both 
candidate and associated countries. FYRO M (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) 
became a candidate country in December 2005 as did Albania and Montenegro in the course of 2008. All three countries appear unde r the heading "candidate countries" in the 
2008 statistical tables of the annual report. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are 
associated countries in the framework of the European Economic Area, whereas 
Switzerland and Israel are associated count ries in the framework of an association 
agreement. 
Table 1 presents the full history of propos als received in response to both single- and 
two-stage calls together with the correspond ing success rates. Please note that Table 1 
includes continuously open calls, which may contain both single stage and two stage 
proposals (i.e. FP7-ICT-2007-C). Tables 1a a nd 1b, report on single-stage calls and only 
on the second stage of two-stage calls. Tabl es 2a and 2b report on retained proposals 
only.  
In proposals for Marie Curie Actions in s upport for training and car eer development of 
researchers, data on project co st and requested EC financial contribution is not collected 
and therefore not reported. The reported fina ncial data refer only to 63 proposals for 
Coordination and Support Actions (CSA) submi tted in response to the following calls for 
proposals: FP7-PEOPLE-NIGHT-2008, FP7-PEOPLE-2007-2-3-COFUND, FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES-2008, FP7-PEOPLE-ERG-2008, FP7-PEOPLE-IRG-2008, FP7-
PEOPLE-IEF-2008, FP7-PEOPLE-IIF-2008, FP7-PEOPLE-IOF-2008. 
Applicants in the scope of PEOPLE as well as IDEAS refer to hosting 
organisations/institutions. 
The "Higher Education" and "N on Profit Research Organisations " types of activities (see 
table 3b) are not mutually exclusive categor ies since a higher education establishment 
may also be a non-profit research  organisation and vice versa. 
The combinations of legal status categories pr esented in tables 3b and 3e are all mutually 
exclusive. 
The figures related to EC financial contribu tions refer to commitments and not payments. 
A collaborative link is assumed to exist be tween each pair of pa rticipants in each 
contract. The number of collaborative links created by a project is calculated in the 
following way 
When there are n participants from a given country  in a project, the number of 
collaborative links between participants from the given country formed as a result of the 
project is assumed to be n*(n-1)/2 .
 
When there are m participants from one country and p from another country in a project, 
the number of collaborative links  created between the two c ountries as a result of the 
project is assumed to be m*p. 
 
EN 65   EN The total number of collaborative links is th en calculated by summi ng across all projects. 
Fusion contracts are omitted in the statistics due to the unavailability of data 
5.2. List of tables in the statistical annex 
Table 1: List of FP7 concluded calls for proposals in 2008. 
Table 1a: FP7 Eligible proposals in 2008: Participation by Pr iority Area & Funding 
Scheme. 
Table 1b: FP7 Eligible proposals in 2008: Pa rticipation by Priority Area & Country. 
Table 2a: FP7 Proposals retained for funding that were submitted in 2008: Participation 
by Priority Area & Funding Scheme 
Table 2b: FP7 Proposals retained for funding that were submitted in 2008: Participation 
by Priority Area and Country 
Table 3a: FP7 Grant Agreements signed in 2008: Participati on & Contribution by 
Priority Area and Funding Scheme 
Table 3b: FP7 Grant Agreements signed in  2008: Participation & Contribution by 
Priority Area and Holders' t ype of activity/Legal Status. 
Table 3c: FP7 Grant Agreements signed in 2008: Participati on & Contribution by 
Priority Area and Country 
Table 3d: FP7 grant agreements signed in 2008: Participation & Contribution by Funding 
Scheme and Country 
Table 3e: FP7 grant Agreements signed in 2008: Participati on & Contribution by 
Holders' Country of origin and Legal status. 
Table 3f: FP7 grant Agreements signed in 2008:  Participation & Contribution by Holders' 
Country of origin and Type of activity. 
Table 4: Collaborative links grant holder s within signed grant agreements in 2008. 
 
EN 66   EN ANNEX I: PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE INNOVATIVE MEDICINES INITATIVE (IMI)  
JTI109  
This Annex provides reporting on progress achi eved by the IMI JTI in 2008, as foreseen 
in Article 11 (1) of Council Re gulation 2008/73/EC of 20 December 2007. 
I.1. IMI JTI first call overview 
I.1.1. Timetable The Innovative Medicines Initia tive is a unique Public-Priva te Partnership (PPP) between 
the pharmaceutical industry represented by th e European Federation of Pharmaceutical 
Industries and Associations (EFPIA) and th e European Communities represented by the 
Commission.  
The first IMI call was publis hed on 30 April 2008. The first st age of the call invited 
Expression of Interest of  Applicant Consortia (e.g. collaborations between academia, 
SMEs, patient organisations, non EFPIA industr y, etc.) to be submitted in response to 
call topics included in the call. The deadline for Expression of Interest submission was 15 
July 2008. 
At the second stage, the best ranked Expressi on of Interest submitte d in each topic of the 
call has been invited to form joint consortia with pre-established EFPIA consortia already 
associated with the topic and to submit fu ll project proposals. The deadline for full 
project proposal submission was 20 January 2009. 
The 2nd peer review ended at the beginning of  March. Two full proj ect proposals did not 
reach consensus and will be re-assessed in May 2009.  
Graph 1: Timetable of the first call 
                                                 
109 For further information, see http://imi.europa.eu   
 
EN 67   EN I.1.2. Topics 
18 topics were opened in the first call, covering three of the four pillars of the IMI 
Research Agenda.  
Pillar I: Improving the Predictivity of Safety Evaluation  
Topic 1: Improve Predictivity of Immunogenicity Topic 2: Non-genot oxic carcinogenesis 
Topic 3: Expert systems for in  silico toxicity prediction 
Topic 4: Improved predictivity of  non-clinical safety evaluation 
Topic 5: Qualification of translational safety biomarkers Topic 6: Strengthening the monitoring of the benefit/risk of medicines 
Pillar II: Improving the Predic tivity of Efficacy Evaluation
 
Topic 7: Islet cell research Topic 8: Surrogate markers for vascular endpoints Topic 9: Pain research Topic 10: New tools for the development of novel therapies in psychiatric disorders 
Topic 11: Neurodegenerative disorders Topic 12: Understanding severe asthma Topic 13: COPD patient recorded outcomes 
Pillar IV: Improving the Predic tivity of Efficacy Evaluation
 
Topic 14: European Medicines Research Training Network 
Topic 15: Safety sciences fo r medicines training programme 
Topic 16: Pharmaceutical medicine training programme Topic 17: Integrated medicines development training programme 
Topic 18: Pharmacovigila nce training programme 
Activities in the Pillar III 'Closing the gap in Knowledge Management ' were not included 
in the first call and therefore will have  correspondingly higher priority for 2009. 
I.1.3. Budget 
I.1.3.1. Overall budget  
The total budget available for the first call reaches EUR 295.5 million. It includes a 
financial contribution from the EC to the IMI JU of a maximum of EUR 123 million and 
‘in kind’ contributions estimated to EUR 172.5 million by the research based companies 
that are EFPIA members (‘i n kind’ meaning non monetary  contributions such as 
personnel, equipment, consumables, etc.).  
 
EN 68   EN 
 
Graph 2: Share of the overa ll budget for the first call 
I.1.3.2. Budget per pillar and topic 
Contribution from IMI JU and EFPIA members in  Pillar I and Pillar II is equal in total 
and reaches € 131.5 million. The budget availabl e in Pillar IV reaches EUR 32.5 million.  
 
Graph 3: IMI JU and EFPIA contribu tion in the first call (in M€) 
The indicative budget breakdown for each topic as  published in the call is summarized in 
the following table. 
Pillar Topic IMI JU  EFPIA Minimum total 
project costs 
1 9 13 22 
2 9 12.5 21.5 
3 4 5 9 
4 7 10 17 I 
5 15 21 36 
 
EN 69   EN 6 11 15 26 
Total 55 76.5 131.5 
7 7 10 17 
8 14 20 34 
9 5 7.5 12.5 
10 7 10 17 
11 5 7.5 12.5 
12 9 12.5 21.5 
13 7 10 17 II 
Total 54 77.5 131.5 
14 4 5 9 
15 2 3 5 
16 3 4 7 
17 2 3 5 
18 3 3.5 6.5 IV 
Total 14 18.5 32.5 
 Grand total 123 172.5 295.5 
I.1.3.3.Indicative EFPIA participation in the call 
Graph 4: EFPIA members' indicative participation in the first call 
 
EN 70   EN The graph presents the indicative number of participation per EFPIA company in the first 
call. 26 EFPIA companies are involved in this first call.  
I.2. First stage of the call: Ex pression of Interest (EoI)  
I.2.1. Typology of applicants110  
I.2.1.1. Overview 
In total, 138 Expression of Interest (EoI) ha ve been submitted to the IMI JU for the 18 
topics whereof three were deemed ineligible (i.e. not submitted before the deadline or for 
lacking necessary documents as stated by the call). The three ineligibles Expression of 
Interest have been submitted in topic 2, 10 and 11.  
More than half of EoI have been submitted in Pillar II. Nearly 1/3 of all EoI have been 
submitted in Pillar I and 14.2% have  been submitted in Pillar IV. 
Graph 5: EoI submitted per Pillar 
The overall participation of the different ty pes of organisations in  the Expressions of 
Interest is displayed below. 
 Academia SMEs Patient 
Organisations Agencies / 
Regulatory Industry/ 
Associations111 Total 
Applicant
s 1.000 220 44 23 7 1.294 
% 77.3% 17% 3.4% 1.8% 0.5% 100% 
Close to 1300 applicants participated in the submitted Expressions of Interests. 77.3% of 
these participants came from academia, 17% from SMEs, 3.4% from patient advocacy groups, 1.8% from regulatory organisations, 0. 5% came from other industry associations 
or companies (non EFPIA) which were larger than SMEs. 
                                                
 
110 Applicant status is not checked at this stage and corresponds to appli cants' self-declaration. 
111 Industry/Associations that are non EFPIA and larger than SMEs 
 
EN 71   EN I.2.1.2. Applicants per Pillar 
Pillar I: Topic 1 to 6 
 Academia SMEs Patient 
Organisations Agencies / 
Regulatory Industry/ 
Associations Total 
Applicant
s 269 98 5 18 0 390 
% 69% 25% 1.3% 4.6% 0% 100% 
41 eligible Expressions of Interest have b een submitted in the six topics of Pillar I 
gathering 390 organisations. W ith 25% of SMEs, this Pillar is the one where SMEs are 
the most represented. Academia constitutes by far the largest group with 69% of applicants. Non EFPIA industry and associations  are also well represented in this Pillar 
with 4.6% of all applicants while Patient or ganisations reach 1.3% of all organisations. 
Pillar II: Topic 7 to 13 
 Academia SMEs Patient 
Organisations Agencies / 
Regulatory Industry/ 
Associations Total 
Applicant
s 592 102 32 2 3 731 
% 81% 14% 4.4% 0.3% 0.4% 100% 
Pillar II is the most competitive Pillar with 75 eligible Expressions of Interest submitted 
for the first stage. In total 731 organisations ha ve participated to this Pillar. Academia is 
the most important group with 81% of all organisations. It is followed by SMEs (14%) 
and Patient Organisations (4.4%). Togeth er, Agencies / Regul atory and Industry / 
Associations account for 0.5%  of all applicants.  
Pillar IV: Topic 14 to 18 
 Academia SMEs Patient 
Organisations Agencies / 
Regulatory Industry/ 
Associations Total 
Applicant
s 139 20 7 3 4 173 
% 80.3% 11.6% 4% 1.7% 2% 100% 
19 Expressions of Interest have been s ubmitted in Pillar IV accounting for 173 
applicants. In this Pillar like in Pillar II, Academia represents 80%. It is followed by 
SMEs (11.6%) and Patient Organisations (4 %). The smallest groups are Industry / 
Associations (2%) and Agencies / Regulatory (1.7%). 
I.2.2. Country participation 
Organisations from 36 countries  have applied in the first call. Three different groups can 
be distinguished: 
 
EN 72   EN A first group of 4 countries:  United Kingdom, Germany, Ital y and France account for 
52.5% of all applicants in the first stage. A cademia is by far the most involved type of 
organisations as they represent 70% to 80% of applicants in each of these countries. 
SMEs are also well represented as they  account for 12.4% to 25% of applicants. 
Together, SMEs in these four countries account  for more than 53% of all applying SMEs.  
A second group of 14 countries:  These countries account for 40.6% of all applicants. The 
Netherlands, Spain and Sweden are the most  important countries in this group. Two 
associated countries, Israel and Switzerland, ar e also well represented in this group as 
two members States from 2004 enlargement (P oland and Hungary). In total this second 
group accounts for 41.6 % of Academia applications and 33% of SMEs. 
A third group of 18 countries:  Each of these countries acc ount for less than 1% of all 
applicants. 9 countries have one  or two applicants in total. The United States Australia 
and Russia are part of this group. In total,  these 20 countries account for 7% of all 
applications.  
 
EN 73   EN 050100150200250
UK
DE
IT
FR
NL
ES
SE
CH
BE
AT
DK
GR
FI
IL
PT
IE
PL
HU
NO
CZ
EE
US
BG
LV
RO
SK
RS
IS
LT
LU
RU
SI
AU
CY
HR
TRIndustry / Associations
Agencies  / Regulatory
Patient Organisations
SMEs
Academics  / Univers ities
 
Graph 6: Country participation in the first stage – EoI 
 
EN 74   EN Country Academia SMEs Patient 
Org. Agencies / 
Regulatory Ind./ 
Assoc. Total % 
UK 167 53 9 8 1 238 18,4% 
DE 138 25 5 2  170 13,1% 
IT 117 18 4 6  145 11,2% 
FR 94 32    126 9,7% 
NL 64 6 6 2 2 80 6,2% 
ES 63 7 3 1 1 75 5,8% 
SE 55 15 3 1  74 5,7% 
CH 41 6 1   48 3,7% 
BE 29 5 7 1 2 44 3,4% 
AT 34 9    43 3,3% 
DK 38 1 1 1 1 42 3,2% 
GR 23 5 1   29 2,2% 
FI 24 4    28 2,2% 
IL 13 6    19 1,5% 
PT 12 3 1   16 1,2% 
IE 10 4  1  15 1,2% 
PL 13 1    14 1,1% 
HU 7 6    13 1,0% 
NO 11 1    12 0,9% 
CZ 9     9 0,7% 
EE 7 2    9 0,7% 
US 2 5    7 0,5% 
BG 4 1    5 0,4% 
LV 3 1 1   5 0,4% 
RO 5     5 0,4% 
SK 5     5 0,4% 
 
EN 75   EN RS 4     4 0,3% 
IS  2    2 0,2% 
LT 2     2 0,2% 
LU   2   2 0,2% 
RU 1 1    2 0,2% 
SI 2     2 0,2% 
AU 1     1 0,1% 
CY  1    1 0,1% 
HR 1     1 0,1% 
TR 1     1 0,1% 
Total 1.000 220 44 23 7 1.294 100% 
 
I.2.3. Evaluation results  
I.2.3.1. Evaluation procedure  
The eligible Expressions of interests were ev aluated by peer review committees composed of 
at least 5 independent experts next to the co-ordinator and the deputy co-ordinator of the 
‘EFPIA consortium’ associated to the topic ev aluated by the panel. The evaluations were 
conducted via individual remote evaluation foll owed by consensus meetings in Brussels. A 
total of 150 experts participated in the eval uations of the Expressions of Interests. 
The Expressions of Interest were evaluate d against the following four criteria:  
– Scientific and/or tec hnological excellence: tota l score 20, threshold 14 
– Partnership case (i.e. quality and experience of the individua l partners): total score 10, 
threshold 7 
– Quality of the applicant consortium as a whole: total score 5  
– Quality and soundness of the work plan, including the budget: total score 5 
I.2.3.2. Success rate 
56 of the Expressions of Interest (41.8 %) were  favourably evaluated, i.e. ranked above the 
defined threshold. Ranked lists with the high est scoring Expressions of Interests were 
established for each topic. The remaining non ra nked Expressions of Interests were rejected 
following the decision of the Governing Board.  
 
EN 76   EN 48.7% of all EoI have passed the threshold in P illar I, 39.1% in Pillar II and 36.8% in Pillar 
IV. However, only the best EoI in each topic ha ve been invited to ap ply for the second stage 
to form Full Project Consortia w ith pre-defined EFPIA consortia. 
Then, the average success rate at the first stage is 13.3%. The most selective Pillar is Pillar 2 – 
Efficacy Evaluation - with 9.4% of all EoI select ed for the second stage. It is followed by 
Pillar 1 - Safety Evaluation (14.6%) and Pillar 4 – Education and Training (26.3%). 
 First stage - EoI 
Pillar  
number  Pillar short 
name  Topic 
Number  Eligible 
EoI Above 
threshold Selected 
EoI 
I Safety 
Evaluation 1 to 6 41 20 48.7%  6 14.6%  
II Efficacy 
Evaluation 7 to 13 74 29 39.1%  7 9.4%  
IV Education 
and 
Training 14 to 18 19 7 36.8%  5 26.3%  
Total  - - 134 56 41.8%  18 13.3%  
 
EN 77   EN ANNEX II : PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE ENIAC  JTI112  
This Annex provides reportin g on progress achieved by the EN IAC JTI in 2008, as foreseen 
in Article 11 (1) of Council Re gulation 2008/72/EC of 20 December 2007. 
II.1. ENIAC JU first call overview 
II.1.1. Timetable The first ENIAC call was published on 8 May 2008. For this call a one-stage submission 
procedure was followed. The deadline for proposal submission was the 3rd of September 2008. 
The evaluation of proposals took place in Brusse ls during the week from 29 September to 3 
October 2008.  
 
Evaluation 
/ Selection Informal 
Project 
Outline  
phase 
Fast Kick-Off Call for 1st year Call Open for Full 
Project Proposals Projects 
Start 
 
Graph 1: Timetable of the first call 
II.1.2. Topics 
Sub-Programmes 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 were opened for proposals in this call: 
SP2 - Nanoelectronics for Transport & Mobility SP3 - Nanoelectronics for Security & Safety SP4 - Nanoelectronics for Energy & Environment SP7 - Design Methods & T ools for Nanoelectronics 
SP8 - Equipment & Materials for Nanoelectronics 
                                                
 
112 For further information, see http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/nanoelectronics/eniac_en.html   
 
EN 78   EN 
 
Graph 2: Mapping the JU RA on the SRA technology domains 
SP2 - Nanoelectronics for Transport & Mobility  
Both short term and long term research activitie s in the field of Nanoelectronics enabling the 
roadmaps defined by the Technology Platform for Automotive ERTRAC and in line with the 
SRA of the eRTD working Group of the eSafety Forum. 
Industrially driven pr ojects for Nanoelectronics Resear ch for Transport and Mobility 
addressing the areas of: 
Components and miniaturized (sub) systems for Assisted driving.  
Technology, components and miniat urized (sub)systems for advanced engine control systems 
and exhaust and combustion control.  
Power and high voltage electronics and smart mi niaturized systems for hybrid and electrical 
cars.  
Development of fail safe and fau lt tolerant electronic systems. 
SP3 - Nanoelectronics for Security & Safety  
Short and long term activities enabling new safe ty and security systems that need to be 
reliable, secure, safe, fault tolerant, easy to us e and capable of safeguarding the privacy of end 
users.  
Industrially driven projects for Nanoelectronics Research for Security and Safety addressing 
the areas of: 
Trusted devices and smart secure portable objects.  All-in-one imaging sensors.  
 
EN 79   EN SP4 - Nanoelectronics for Energy & Environment  
Both short and mid term activities providing innovative technologies as  the basis for new 
energy efficient products and intelligent power management to enable increased competence 
in these emerging lead markets in line  with the 'sustainability' objective.  
Industrially driven projects for Nanoelectroni cs Research for Energy and Environment 
addressing the areas of:  
Intelligent drive control. Efficient power supplies and power management solutions . 
SP7 - Design Methods & Tools for Nanoelectronics
 
Short and mid term activities enabling the efficient design of advanced components, Systems 
on chip, Systems in a Package and compact miniaturized electronic (sub)systems. 
Industrially driven projects for Desi gn Methods and Tools for Nanoelectronics  addressing the 
areas of:  
Device, circuit, and system variability and reliability. Hardware/software model driven hi-l evel synthesis/flow/reuse/design. 
SP8 - Equipment & Materials for Nanoelectronics
 
Both short term and mid term research activ ities enabling that the European semiconductor 
component and (sub) systems industry rema in competitive without  sacrificing the 
sustainability of the industry. 
Industrially driven projects for equipmen t and materials addre ssing the areas of:  
Advanced line operation. Lithography process for beyond 32nm manufacturing. R&D for assembling technology for system-in-package. 
II.1.3. Budget 
II.1.3.1.Overall budget  
The total budget available for the first call re ached EUR 180 million. It included a financial 
contribution from the EC to the ENIAC JU of EUR 32 million, a contribution from ENIAC 
Member States of EUR 58 million (see table 1) and ‘in kind’ contributions from R&D actors 
of minimum EUR 90 million (‘ in kind’ meaning non monetary contributions such as 
personnel, equipment, consumables, etc.).  
 
EN 80   EN  
ENIAC Member State Contribution to ENIAC 
Call 1 (EUR million) 
Austria 4 
Belgium  1.5 
Czech Republic 1.5 
Estonia 0 
France 8 
Germany 15 
Greece 0.5 
Hungary 1.32 
Ireland 1 
Italy 10 
Netherlands 10 
Norway 1.5 
Poland 1 
Portugal 0.5 
Spain 1 
Sweden 1 
United Kingdom 0 
Table 1: Contribution from ENIAC Member States to ENIAC call 1. 
II.2. Analysis of ENIAC Call 1  
II.2.1. Typology of applicants  A total of 12 proposals were received, request ing a total national gr ant of EUR 122.4 million 
and a total JU grant of EUR 71.1 million. None of  the received proposals were excluded from 
evaluation because of ineligibility reasons (i neligible submission, ineligible consortium, 
incomplete proposal or being out of scope of the call).  
All sub-programmes opened in the call were addressed by at least one proposal and several 
proposals addressed more than one subprogram.  
 
EN 81   EN SP2 SP4
2
17%
SP2 SP4 SP8
1
8%
SP3
1
8%
SP4
1
8%SP7
1
8%SP8
6
51%
Graph 3: Proposals submitted per sub-programme 
The overall participation of th e different types of organi sations in the proposals is 
displayed in the table and diagram below. 
 Academia SMEs Large 
industries Research Other Total 
Applicants 42 62 95 63 3 265 
% 15.8% 23.4% 35.9% 23.8% 1.1% 100% 
Table 2: Typology of applicants of submitted proposals. 
265 participations out of 20 countries participat ed in the submitted proposals including most 
major European actors in the semiconductor fi eld. 35.9% of these part icipants came from 
large industries, 23.8% from research centres , 23.4% from SMEs, 15.8% from academia, and 
1.1% came from other type of organisation. 
II.2.2. Country participation 
Organisations from 20 countries ha ve applied in the first call.  
 
EN 82   EN 0102030405060
AU BE CH CZ DE ES FI FR GR HU IE IL IT NL NO PL PT RO SE UKOther
Research
Academia
SMEs
Large industries
 
Graph 4: Country participation in submitted proposals 
Country Large 
industries SMEs Academia Research Other TOTAL % 
AU 9 3 7 3 0 22 8,3 
BE 3 3 1 2 1 10 3,8 
CH 0 0 0 1 0 1 0,4 
CZ 0 1 1 0 0 2 0,8 
DE 23 9 2 13 0 47 17,7 
ES 0 4 2 7 0 13 4,9 
FI 2 0 0 1 0 3 1,1 
FR 28 13 3 10 0 54 20,4 
GR 0 4 0 3 0 7 2,6 
HU 1 3 2 1 0 7 2,6 
IE 1 2 3 2 0 8 3,0 
IL 1 0 0 1 0 2 0,8 
IT 15 6 14 7 2 44 16,6 
NL 12 2 4 3 0 21 7,9 
NO 0 3 0 3 0 6 2,3 
 
EN 83   EN PL 0 2 1 1 0 4 1,5 
PT 0 1 0 3 0 4 1,5 
RO 0 0 0 2 0 2 0,8 
SE 0 4 1 0 0 5 1,9 
UK 0 2 1 0 0 3 1,1 
TOTAL 95 62 42 63 3 265 100,0 
Table 3: Applicant per type and country in submitted proposals. 
II.2.3. Evaluation results  
II.2.3.1.Evaluation procedure  
Following evaluation by external experts, 9 proposals (75%) achieved scores on all 
criteria above thresholds. The total na tional grant requested by all the "above 
threshold" proposals in this call is EUR110.9 million. The total ENIAC JU grant 
requested by all the "above threshold" propos als in this call is EUR 65.2 million. The 
total national funding pre-allo cated to this call is EUR 57.8 million whereas the total 
ENIAC JU pre-allocated funding is EUR 32 million. 
The proposals were evaluated agains t the following five criteria:  
– Relevance and contributions to the content and objectives of the Call.: total score 10, 
threshold 6 
– R&D innovation and technical excelle nce: total score 10, threshold 6 
– S&T approach and work plan : total score 10, threshold 6 
– Market innovation and impact: total score 10, threshold 6 
– Quality of consortium and management: total score 10, threshold 0 
TOTAL SCORE 50, Threshold 35 
II.2.3.2.Evaluation results 9 proposals were selected and retained for negotiation by the ENIA C Public Authorities 
Board (PAB). The 3 proposals in the "below threshold" list were rejected as their scores were 
below threshold in one or more evaluation criteria or below the minimum total score 
required.. 
 
EN 84   EN II.2.3.3.Statistics of selected proposals 
Number of participations
Total 184
63; 35%
45; 24%43; 23%33; 18%
Large enterprises
SMEs
Research organisations
education
 
Graph 5: Number of participati ons in selected proposals 
Number of companies
Total 121
30; 25%
44; 36%22; 18%25; 21%
Large enterprises
SMEs
Research organisations
education
 
Graph 6: Number of different co mpanies in selected proposals 
 
EN 85   EN  
National funding
58,6 M€
48%
23%16%13%JU funding
35,4 M€
61%16%16%7%
La rg e e nt erp ris es
R ese ar ch  ce nt ers
SM Es
Education
A ccepted eligible costs
213,1 M€
60%
16%16%8%
 
Graph 7: Budget per type of parti cipant in selected proposals 
 
National funding
58,6 M€
47%
25%15%13%
SP8
SP4
SP2
SP7JU funding
35,4 M€
49 %
24%15%12%
Accepted eligible costs
213, 1 M€
49%
24%15%12%
 
Graph 8: Budget per activity ty pe in selected proposals 
 
EN 86   EN 
Graph 9: Public funding per c ountry in selected proposals 
 
EN 87   EN ANNEX III : PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE ARTEMIS  JTI113  
This Annex provides reporting on progress achieved by the ARTEMIS JTI in 2008, as 
foreseen in Article 11 (1) of Counc il Regulation 2008/74/EC of 20 December 2007. 
III.1. Introduction 
The following report presents statistics from the first ARTEMIS call, published on 8 May 
2008. 
III.2. Response to the call 
A total of 27 proposals were received for this call, requesting a total cost of EUR 323 million, 
a total national grant of EUR 115 million and a to tal JU grant of EUR 54 million. None of the 
received proposals were excluded from evaluatio n because of ineligibil ity reasons (ineligible 
submission, ineligible consortium, incomplete pr oposal or being out of scope of the Call). 
The breakdown between the 8 Sub-Programmes is as follows: Sub Programme 1: 9 proposals received Sub Programme 2: 2 proposals received Sub Programme 3: 5 proposals received Sub Programme 4: 3 proposals received Sub Programme 5: 4 proposals received 
Sub Programme 6: 2 proposals received 
Sub Programme 7: 1 proposals  received  
Sub Programme 8: 1 proposals received 
                                                
 
113 For further information, see https://www.artemis-ju.eu/   
 
EN 88   EN III.3. Overview 
The total national funding pre-a llocated to this call is EU R 63,8 million whereas the total 
ARTEMIS JU pre-allocate d funding is EUR 35,1 million. 
  ARTEMIS  
  Call 1 
2008  
National 63,8M€ 
JU (EC) 35,1M€ Call Budget 
Total 98,9M€ 
Proposals received 27 
Total funding requested  169M€  Call response 
Oversubscription ratio 1,7/1 
Evaluation results  Projects selected for 
funding 12 
III.4. Statistics for all proposals 
Total number of Participations
University; 90; 
23%
Research; 63; 
16%
Large; 122; 30%SME; 114; 29%Other; 8; 2%
 
 
EN 89   EN Number of distinct participations
University; 73; 
25%
Research; 42; 
14%
Large; 59; 20%SME; 109; 38%Other; 8; 3%
 
Total requested costs
University; 42,8; 
13%
Research; 46,3; 
14%
Large; 177,5; 
55%SME; 53,6; 17%Other; 3,8; 1%
 
Total requested funding
University; 28,9; 
17%
Research; 34,3; 
20%
Large; 75,5; 45%SME; 28,2; 17%Other; 2,1; 1%
 
 
EN 90   EN III.5. Selection 
12 proposals were selected and retained for ne gotiation by the ARTEMIS  Public Authorities 
Board (PAB). 2 proposals were put on a rese rve list. The 10 proposals in the "below 
threshold" list were rejected as their scores were below thre shold in one or more evaluation 
criteria or below the minimum total score requi red. 3 proposals were rejected as the Public 
Authorities Board deems them not financially viable due to limitations in the available public 
funding. 
The 12 proposals amount to a total costs of EUR 196.59 million, and the total public funding 
allocation is as follows: 
 Public funding 
allocated  
Austria 3.699.318,76 €
Belgium 1.515.599,70 €
Czech Republic 872.875,28 €
Germany 8.801.508,03 €
Denmark 800.500,00 €
Estonia 0 €
Spain 5.999.274,16 €
Finland 5.098.522,00 €
France 5.052.628,37 €
Greece 1.574.573,20 €
Hungary 2.035.741,00 €
Ireland 644.477,00 €
Italy 7.999.874,54 €
Netherlands 7.385.182,42 €
Norway 1.500.000,00 €
Portugal 769.755,90 €
Romania 0 €
Sweden 2.773.056,48 €
Slovenia 0 €
United Kingdom 3.611.714,98 €
Other 0 €
 
EN 91   EN ARTEMIS JU  
 32.830.838,45 €
Total public funding 
allocated 92.965.440,27 €
 
III.6. Statistics for selected proposals 
Total number of Participations
University; 52; 
23%
Research; 28; 13%
Large; 82; 36%SME; 60; 27%Other; 2; 1%
 
Number of distinct participations
University; 40; 26%
Research; 18; 12%
Large; 37; 24%SME; 57; 37%Other; 2; 1%
 
 
EN 92   EN Total requested costs
University; 24,7; 
12%
Research; 24; 12%
Large; 124; 61%SME; 31; 15%Other; 1; 0%
 
Total requested funding
University; 17,4; 
17%
Research; 17,9; 
17%
Large; 52; 51%SME; 16,1; 15%Other; 0,5; 0%
 
 
EN 93   EN ANNEX IV : PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE CLEAN SKY JTI114  
This Annex provides reporting on progress achieved by the Clean Sky JTI in 2008, as 
foreseen in Article 11 (1) of Counc il Regulation 2008/71/EC of 20 December 2007. 
IV.1. Clean Sky ju first grant agreements for members 
IV.1.1. Timetable The first Clean Sky JU grant agreements we re negotiated in November 2008 and signed in 
November and December 2008. 
The pre-financings for the seven signed grant ag reements were paid to the coordinators in 
December 2008. 
IV.1.2. Clean Sky Milestones for 2008 
The Clean Sky JTI is organised around 6 Integr ated Technology Demonstrations (ITD), which 
will develop a large set of innovative technologies covering all segments of commercial aviation. Most activities defining  the basic technology options, th e new configurations and the 
demonstrators' options will be launched in the early phase of Clean Sky.  
The Technology Evaluator (TE) wi ll assess the environmental im pact of those technologies. 
Activities on requirements and architecture, on model development at mission, operation and 
Air Transport System and their validation, a nd on development of the simulation framework 
will all start within the fi rst 12 months of Clean Sky. 
IV.1.3. Integrated Technology Demonstrators (ITDs) 
Topics are covered by these Integrated Technology Demonstrators (ITDs) and the  Technology 
Evaluator: 
– SMART fixed wing aircraft 
– Green Regional Aircraft 
– Green Rotorcraft 
– Sustainable and Green Engine 
– Systems for Green Operations 
– Eco-Design 
IV.1.3.1. Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft ITD For the first 18 months of the programme the focus of the SFWA work plan will be on the 
following activities: 
                                                
 
114 For further information, see https://www.cleansky.eu/   
 
EN 94   EN – development of the passive flow and load control technologies;  
– the passive wing concepts and the definition/down-selection of the demonstrator vehicles 
for the first phase of passive testing on the High-Speed/Low-Drag demonstrator;  
– the Contra Rotating Open Rotor Flying Test Bed and the Long-Duration flight trials. 
IV.1.3.2. Green Regional Aircraft ITD For the first 18 months of the programme the focus of the GRA work plan will be on the 
following activities: 
– develop the most promising “mainstream” tec hnologies best fitting the requirement of 
greening the regional aircraft; 
– integrate composite multi-layer/multi-function architecture solutions from mainstream 
technologies in the GRA Demonstrators; 
– active monitoring through sensor ing of events occurring to each aircraft and associated 
maintenance approach and tool development. 
IV.1.3.3. Green Rotorcraft ITD Most activities of the GRO work plan will be launched in the early period. They comprise: 
– preparation of the Technology Ev aluator for the rotorcraft; 
– innovative rotor blades and engine installation for noise reduction; 
– reduced airframe drag and dynamic systems; 
– integration of diesel engine technology an d advanced electrical systems for fuel 
consumption reduction; 
– environmentally friendly flight paths 
IV.1.3.4. Sustainable and Green Engines ITD Activities on all SAGE demonstrators will st art in the early phas e of Clean Sky. They 
comprise: 
– Open Rotor Assembly (SAGE 1), aiming at dem onstrating at full scale the functionality of 
an open rotor propulsion system, including the co re engine assembly and test definition.  
– Direct Driven Pusher Open Rotor (SAGE 2 - co unter rotating propfans placed at the engine 
rear and mounted on a stator-less counter ro tating low-pressure turbine) focusing on 
reduction of SFC, and CO2 and NOx emissions; 
– Low weight approach overall (SAGE 3), including low pressu re intercooler installations, 
flow control systems and integration aiming towards a more electric engine; 
– high efficiency and low noise geared turbofan  concept (SAGE 4) pr oviding a step change 
in fuel burn reduction combined with a strong decrease in noise emission;  
 
EN 95   EN – ITD turbo-shaft engine (SAGE 5) aiming sp ecifically at weight, noise and emission 
reduction in helicopters. 
IV.1.3.5. Systems for Green Operations ITD Most activities of the SGO work plan will be launched in the early period. They comprise: 
– all-electric aircraft equipment and systems architectures; 
– management of aircraft energy requirements; 
– mission and trajectory management and links to the SESAR JU activities; 
– improved ground operations. 
IV.1.3.6. Eco-Design ITD Activities in the Eco-Design ITD will encomp ass the whole life cy cle of materials and 
systems, focusing on the optimal use of raw ma terials, decreasing the use of non-renewable 
materials and of natural resources, limiting energy consumption and the emission of noxious 
effluents, and on recycling.  
The initial activities will concentrate on vehi cle systems analysis at aircraft level. 
IV.1.3.7. Technology Evaluator The basis for interaction between the TE and all ITDs will be launched in the early part of 
Clean Sky. They include: 
– definition of model framework architecture, id entification of requirements like input data 
necessary to perform mode ling and quantification; 
– elaboration of state-of-the-art  metrics and outputs relevant for the scope of the Technology 
Evaluator in line with the ACARE goals, including model and data consistency 
assessments;  
– methodology definition to perform those studies and to ensure support for ITDs decisions 
on demonstrators; 
– definition of overall operations and ar chitecture of the Technology Evaluator. 
IV.2. Budget 
IV.2.1. Overall Budget 
ITD EcD GRC SFWA SAGE GRA SGO TE TotalJU  
contribution
Total 2.066 4.020 9.433 8.921 3.863 5.541 495 34.339 17.170 
 
EN 96   EN IV.2.2. Budget per ITD 
Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  
contribution(k€)
Airbus S.A.S. 116,000 58,000
Airbus France SAS 2.080,000 1.040,000Airbus Deutschland GmbH 1.720,000 860,000Airbus UK Limited 1.450,000 725,000Airbus España S.L. 82,000 41,000SAAB AB 837,000 418,500Dassault Aviation SA 286,000 143,000EADS - CONSTRUCCIONES AERONAUTICAS S.A. SOCIEDAD UNIPERSONAL90,000 45,000
Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten 
Forschung e.V.619,000 309,500
Liebherr-Aerospace Lindenberg GmbH 100,000 50,000
Rolls Royce PLC 68,000 34,000
SAFRAN 0,000 0,000Aircelle 58,000 29,000Messier-Dowty SA 0,000 0,000Messier-Dowty Limited 0,000 0,000Snecma 40,000 20,000Sagem Défense Sécurité 206,000 103,000THALES AVIONICS SA 72,000 36,000Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt DLR 463,000 231,500ONERA – Office National d’Etudes et de Recherches Aérospatiales 155,000 77,500
RUAG Aerospace 106,000 53,000
Stork 
ADSE
Airborne Development B.V.Axxiflex Turbine Tooling B.V.FMLCFOKKER ELMO B.V.Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium (NLR)TU Delft fac. Luchtvaart- en RuimtevaarttechniekUniversiteit Twente
S.C. Institutul National de Cercetari Aerospatiale “Elie 
Carafoli” – INCAS S.A.277,000 138,500
S.C. STRAERO S.A. 0,000 0,000
S.C. AVIOANE Craiova S.A. 0,000 0,000
S.C. ROMAERO S.A. 0,000 0,000
Qinetiq Limited 110,000 55,0002nd Call Associate member 0,000 0,000
Total 9.433,000 4.716,500ITD Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft
249,000 498,000
 
 
EN 97   EN  
Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  contribution
(k€)
Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A 1.436,000 718,000
Alenia Aermacchi 0,000 0,000
Alenia SIA 0,000 0,000
Alenia Improvement 40,000 20,000
EADS - CONSTRUCCIONES AERONAUTICAS S.A. 
SOCIEDAD UNIPERSONAL190,000 95,000
Airbus S.a.S. 0,000 0,000
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft 484,000 242,000
Liebherr 50,000 25,000
Rolls Royce plc 0,000 0,000Rolls-Royce Deutschland 67,000 33,500
Safran 0,000 0,000
Hispano-Suiza 50,000 25,000Messier-Dowty SA 26,000 13,000
Snecma 65,000 32,500
Thales Avionics 88,000 44,000Thales Avionics Electrical Systems SA 40,000 20,000
Piaggio Aeroindustries S.p.A.
Centro Sviluppo Materiali S.p.A.
Distretto Tecnologico sull’Ingegneria dei Materiali 
Polimerici e Compositi e Strutture S.c.a.r.l.,
Fox Bit S.r.l. , in short FoxBitPOLITECNICO DI TORINO, Dipartimento di Ingegneria 
Aerospaziale
SICAMB S.p.A.,  in short SICAMBUniversità degli Studi di Bologna – Facoltà di 
Ingegneria di Forlì - Dipartimento di Ingegneria
Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II”, Polo delle Scienze e della Tecnologia
Università degli Studi  di Pisa- Dipartimento di 
Ingegneria Aerospaziale
Avions de Transport Régional  - ATR  - French Groupement 
d'intérêt Economique - GIE 340,000 170,000
CIRA S.C.p.A
AEROSOFT S.p.A
DEMA SpA
INCAS - National Institute for Aerospace ResearchELSIS, UAB
Hellenic Aerospace Industry 90,000 45,000
Onera 295,000 147,500
Total 3.863,000 1.931,500175,000 350,000Green Regional Aircraft
252,000 126,000
 
 
EN 98   EN Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  
contribution(k€)
Rolls-Royce plc 1.826,000 913,000
Rolls-Royce Deutschland 1.474,000 737,000SAFRAN 0,000 0,000
Aircelle 18,000 9,000
Hispano-Suiza 78,878 39,439Snecma 2.774,385 1.387,193Techspace Aero 128,737 64,369AVIO S.p.A. 459,000 229,500Industria de Turbo Propulsores S.A.  (ITP) 876,000 438,000
MTU Aero Engines GmbH 200,000 100,000
Volvo Aero Corporation 925,000 462,500Volvo Aero Norge 75,000 37,500Airbus SAS 0,000 0,000Airbus France SAS 48,000 24,000Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A. 20,036 10,018
Alenia Aermacchi 18,000 9,000
Total 8.921,036 4.460,518ITD Sustainable and Green Engines
 
Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  
contribution
(k€)
VERTAIR GEIE 58,300 29,150
AGUSTA S.p.A. 654,305 327,153
WESTLAND HELICOPTERS Ltd 505,664 252,832
EUROCOPTER Sas 926,221 463,111
EUROCOPTER DEUTSCHLAND GMBH 253,646 126,823EUROCOPTER ESPAÑA 66,881 33,441
Liebherr-Aer ospace Lindenberg GmbH 12,100 6,050
Thales Avionics Electrical Systems 6,850 3,425
Hispano-Suiza 5,950 2,975
Wytwornia Sprzetu Komunikacyjnego PZL Swidnik Spolka A kcyjna 404,435 202,218
Office National d’Etudes et de Recherches Aérospatiales 129,083 64,542
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. 213,700 106,850
CIRA-SELEX  ATS
Centro Italiano Ricerche Aerospaziali 
SELEX  SISTEMI INTEGRATI S.p.A.
Stichting IGOR
Airborne Composites B.V.
ANOTEC CONSULTING, S.L., Alphei Pueschel Roesler (Akustik Technologie Goettingen)
Eurocarbon B.V.
Fibre Optic Sensors and Sensing Systems b.v.b.a.
LMS International N.V.
Microflown Technologies B.V.
Micromega Dynamics s.a.
Stichting Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
Technische Universiteit Delft
Universiteit Twente
Stichting Nederlands Instituut voor Vliegtuigontwikkeling en Ruimtevaart
Total 4.020,079 2.010,040Green Rotorcraft
199,672 99,836
583,272 291,636
 
 
EN 99   EN Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  contribution
(k€)
Liebherr-Aerospace Lindenberg GmbH 200,000 100,000
Liebherr-Aerospace Toulouse SAS 300,000 150,000Liebherr-Elektronik GmbH 20,000 10,000Thales Avionics 767,000 383,500Thales Avionics Electrical Systems S.A 307,000 153,500Thales Systèmes Aéroportés S.A. 0,000 0,000Airbus SAS 34,087 17,043Airbus France SAS 333,912 166,956Airbus Deutschland GmbH 58,200 29,100
Airbus UK llimited 0,000 0,000
Saab AB 257,200 128,600Alenia Aeronautica 105,040 52,520DASSAULT AVIATION SA 0,000 0,000Rolls-Royce UK 33,191 16,596Safran 0,000 0,000Aircelle 162,000 81,000Hispano-Suiza 215,000 107,500Labinal 100,000 50,000
Messier-Bugatti 200,000 100,000
Messier-Dowty SA 20,000 10,000Snecma 0,000 0,000Techspace Aero 30,000 15,000Technofan 28,000 14,000Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft 10,000 5,000ZODIAC-INTERTECHNIQUE 366,700 183,350Zodiac ECE 209,100 104,550Zodiac Aérazur 94,940 47,470University of Nottingham 300,000 150,000
DEUTSCHES ZENTRUM FUER LUFT UND RAUMFAHRT E.V. 220,000 110,000
EADS Deutschland GmbH (Innovation Works) 397,000 198,500Green Systems for Aircraft Foundation (GSAF) 0,000 0,000Aeronamic BV 0,000 0,000Stichting Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium 40,000 20,000Technische Universiteit Delft 10,100 5,050University of Malta 56,000 28,000Cranfield University 220,800 110,400Diehl Aerospace GmbH 121,096 60,548Galileo Avionica 100,000 50,000
Total 5.316,365 2.658,183ITD Sys tems  for Green Operations
 
 
EN 100   EN Member nameTotal
(k€)JU  contribution
(k€)
DASSAULT AVIATION SA 190,000 95,000
Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.291,800 145,900
AIRBUS SAS 1,000 0,500
Airbus France SAS 31,500 15,750Airbus Deutschland GmbH 31,300 15,650Airbus UK llimited 14,700 7,350Airbus Espana sl 5,800 2,900AGUSTA SpA 44,370 22,185
ALENIA Aeronautica SpA 94,000 47,000
WESTLAND HELICOPTERS Ltd 100,000 50,000EADS - CASA 11,000 5,500EUROCOPTER SAS 29,400 14,700EUROCOPTER DEUTSCHLAND GMBH 117,900 58,950LIEBHERR-AEROSPACE TOULOUSE SAS 45,564 22,782
SAFRAN 0,000 0,000
Aircelle 20,000 10,000Hispano-Suiza 34,417 17,209Microturbo 0,000 0,000Snecma 64,417 32,209Sofrance 8,474 4,237
Technofan 6,118 3,059
Turbomeca 10,000 5,000THALES AVIONICS Electrical Systems 30,900 15,450EADS France - Innovation Works Department 238,214 119,107HELLENIC AEROSPACE INDUSTRY SA 197,000 98,500ISRAEL AEROSPACE I NDUSTRIES Ltd. 180,000 90,000
STORK FOKKER AESP B.V.
ADSEAXXIFLEX Turbine Tools BVNLR (Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium) SERGEM BVTU-Delft, Aerospace FacultyUniv ersity Twente
RUAG Aerospace
ICOTEC AGHUNTSMAN Advanced Materials (Switzerland) GmbHEPFL Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneUniversity of Applied Sciences of Northwestern SwitzerlandETH Zürich
TU Hamburg-Harburg
Advanced Composites Group (ACG)HADEG Recycling GmbH
Total 2.066,304 1.033,152ITD Eco-Design
83,915
100,600 50,300167,830
 
 
EN 101   EN Member name Total (k€)JU  
contribution(k€)
THALES Avionics S.A. 81,000 40,500
THALES Avionics Electrical Systems S.A 0,000 0,000THALES Systèmes Aéroportés S.A. 40,000 20,000AGUSTA SpA 0,000 0,000WESTLAND HELICOPTERS Ltd 15,000 7,500AIRBUS SAS 10,000 5,000AIRBUS France SAS 6,000 3,000AIRBUS Deutschland GmbH 0,000 0,000AIRBUS UK ltd 0,000 0,000AIRBUS Espana sl 0,000 0,000ALENIA Aeronautica SpA 14,000 7,000DASSAULT AVIATION SA 4,800 2,400EADS - CASA 14,000 7,000
EUROCOPTER SAS 0,000 0,000
EUROCOPTER DEUTSCHLAND GMBH 14,000 7,000Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.15,000 7,500
LIEBHERR-AEROSPACE Lindenberg GmbH 12,000 6,000
LIEBHERR-AEROSPACE Toulouse 0,000 0,000ROLLS-ROYCE plc 14,000 7,000SAAB AB 15,000 7,500SAFRAN 0,000 0,000Snecma 16,000 8,000Turbomeca 0,000 0,000Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR) 131,000 65,500CIRA S.C.p.A 17,000 8,500Cranfield University 15,000 7,500Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium (NLR) 34,000 17,000ONERA – Office National d’Etudes et de Recherches Aérospatiales 27,000 13,500
Total 494,800 247,400ITD Technology Evaluator
 
 
EN 102   EN IV.3. Participation 
IV.3.1. Members by country 
FR 73 33,49%
IT 30 13,76%
NL 30 13,76%
DE 29 13,30%UK 17 7,80%ES 10 4,59%
CH 7 3,21%
BE 6 2,75%RO 5 2,29%SE 4 1,83%
GR 2 0,92%
LT 1 0,46%NO 1 0,46%PL 1 0,46%
MT 1 0,46%
IR 1 0,46%
218
 
IV.3.2. Split between industry,  Universities and SME's 
Industry 133 61,01 % 
Universities 50 22,94 % SME 35 16.06 % Total 218  
IV.4. Calls for proposals 
In 2008 no calls for proposals were lauched. 
The budget was committed in 2008 and will the ba sis for the first call for proposals in 2009.