Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions concerning the mid term evaluation of the multiannual Community programme to stimulate the development and use of European digital content on the global networks and to promote linguistic diversity in the information society (eContent)
Date: 2003-10-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, communications policy, information highway, information network, information technology, interactive network, multilingualism, project evaluation

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 10.10.2003
COM(2003) 591 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

concerning the mid term evaluation of the multiannual Community programme to
stimulate the development and use of European digital content on the global networks
and to promote linguistic diversity in the information society (eContent)

   
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

concerning the mid term evaluation of the multiannual Community programme to
stimulate the development and use of European digital content on the global networks
and to promote linguistic diversity in the information society (eContent)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Introduction

This Communication concerns the mid term evaluation of the eContent programme  (2001 –
2004). The evaluation was carried out by a consortium of companies1 contracted on the basis
of public invitations to tender issued by DG Information Society in June 2002. The evaluation
was conducted in the period January to June 2003. The executive summary of the evaluation
report is annexed to this Communication2.

The eContent programme
The objectives of eContent, as specified in its Council Decision3, are to:

(cid:1)  Create  favourable  conditions  for  the  development  of  the  European  multimedia  content

industry.

(cid:1)  Stimulate demand for, and use of, multimedia content.

(cid:1)  Contribute to the professional, social and cultural development of citizens.

(cid:1)  Promote the exchange of knowledge between users and suppliers.

eContent  covers  the  four-year  period  from  January  2001  to  January  2005  with  a  reference
budget of 100 million euro. The programme is implemented through three action lines:

(cid:1)  improving access to and expanding use of public sector information;

(cid:1)  enhancing content production in a multilingual and multicultural environment;

(cid:1)  increasing dynamism of the digital content market.

During the years 2001–2002, 58 projects were co-financed, involving over 468 organisations4.

1

2

3

4

Technopolis Ltd (lead contractor), IDATE, PRISMA.
Mid term evaluation of the eContent Programme: Final Report, June 2003, Technopolis Ltd., IDATE,
PRISMA, full report available at www.cordis.lu/econtent
Council Decision 2001/48/EC of 22 December 2000 (OJ L 14, 18.1.2001, p. 32).
Contracts conclude with consortia resulting from the programme operations in 2001 and 2002, via calls
for proposals.

2

                                                
Evaluation objectives

The eContent mid term evaluation assessed the extent to which the programme was effective
in meeting its objectives in the first two years of implementation as laid down in its Council
Decision;  the  effectiveness  of  the  programme’s  theory  of  action  (intervention  logic);  the
efficiency  of  the  programme's  organisation  and  management;  issues  related  to  rationale,
synergy  and  sustainability;  the  extent  to  which  the  programme  met  the  needs  of  its  target
audience.  The  evaluators  formulated  recommendations  for  the  second  part  of  the  current
programme as well as giving indications for a possible continuation of the activities.

Key evaluation findings

The evaluators found that the benefits of the programme were significant in comparison with
the  level  of  resources  allocated  to  it.  The  programme  fulfils  the  role  of  demonstrating  the
potential  economic  benefits  of  information  held  by  the  public  sector  as  well  as  increased
market access opportunities provided by linguistic and cultural adaptation of digital content to
target audiences.

The evaluators recognised the positive impact of the current programme and expressed a clear
recommendation  to  continue  supporting  digital  content  via  Community  policies  and
programmes.

Detailed findings

More specifically it was concluded that:

–  The  programme  intervention  logic  was  well  designed,  with  a  hierarchy  of  objectives
ranging from the political framework of facilitating “access for all” to the internet, through
the  operational  goals  of  the  action  lines  and  the  results  expected  from  the  individual
projects selected;

–  The programme stimulated projects that would not have happened in the same form
or with the same transnational dimension, thereby showing a high level of additionality and
good use of public funds. In particular, participating organisations recognised the leverage
effect of transnational networking involved in the projects;

–  The  programme  reached  its  target  audience,  mainly  SMEs,  representing  43%  of  the
participants,  followed  by  public  sector  organisations  (40  %).  In  terms  of  funding,  44%
went  to  SMEs,  with  29%  being  received  by  companies  employing  less  than  50  people.
These  beneficiaries  gave  explicit  value  to  the  fact  of  being  able  to  collaborate  in  cross
national projects.

–  The  programme  was  overall  well  managed.  Problems  encountered  during  the
programme's  implementation  were  relatively  minor:  there  were  some  delays  in  awarding
contracts  and  making  payments,  and  networking  and  information  exchange  within  and
between projects could have been more effective.

Main recommendations for the implementation of the eContent programme

The  evaluation  report  contains  recommendations  addressed  to  the  Commission  on  the
implementation  of  the  current  programme  as  well  as  to  the  Member  States.  Below  are  the
main recommendations to the Commission and its response:

3

Recommendation  1:  The  financial  requirements  imposed  on  participants  are  too  strict  for
SMEs and start ups, the  main target  group of  the programme. The Commission should  also
reduce the payment delays to participant organisations.

Commission  comment.  The  legal  and  financial  measures  applied  to  participants  in  the
eContent  programme  are  those  laid  down  in  the  Financial  Regulation  of  the  Communities.
This regulation is built on the principles of sound financial management and the safeguard of
the  public  interest.  All  contractors,  including  SMEs  and  start-ups  need  to  demonstrate  that
they have the capacity to cofinance the project and that they posses the human and financial
resources to implement them. The Commission supports the participation of SMEs and start
ups by providing pre-financing of up to 30% of the contractual amounts, sharing the costs of
financial guarantees when these are needed.

With the entry in to force of the new Financial Regulation on 1 January 2003, the contractual
payment delays applicable to new participants is being reduced from 60 to 45 days from the
acceptance of reports, thereby alleviating the burden for the smaller players.

Recommendation 2: The commercial dimension of projects should be emphasised.

Commission comment. While being market orientated, the eContent programme acts in areas
where  the  risk  of  market  failure  is  widely  recognised  and  the  public  interest  is  high.  The
eContent programme supports financially two types of projects.

Firstly,  projects  based  on  public-private  partnerships  and  or  multilingual/multicultural
applications that aim at achieving demonstrators of revenue producing services. This action is
directly linked to the legislative action in support of re-use of information held by the public
sector  as  proposed  by  the  Commission5.  It  contributes  to  the  change  of  culture  that  public
sector  bodies  need  to  undergo  in  order  to  facilitate  the  re-use  of  public  sector  information
resources.

Secondly, there are projects that prepare the grounds to services to be developed in a second
phase,  interconnecting  existing  data  resources  in  Member  States  specifying  clear  re-use
policies  for  the  use  of  the  data  they  handle.  While  these  projects6  have  a  longer  time-to-
market, they seek to involve potential users of the services resulting at the completion of the
projects themselves.

This approach  results on the one hand to delivering functioning demonstrators  with the first
type of projects while additional data are made available for later exploitation in areas where
the public interest is best served.

Recommendation 3: The feedback to unsuccessful bidders should be improved.

Commission  comment.  Each  proposal  is  evaluated  with  respect  to  a  number  of  criteria
published  in  the  call  documents.  The  Commission  communicates  to  all  bidders  detailed
reasons for the acceptance or the rejection of their proposals. Feedback is offered on each of
those criteria, allowing bidders to review their proposals and – in case – submit an upgraded
version  of  it  to  a  future  call.  In  addition,  the  Commission  services  offer  the  possibility  to

5

6

OJ C 227 E, 24.9.2002, pp. 382-386 - Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council on the reuse and commercial exploitation of public sector documents (COM(2002) 207 final).
See the eContent Council Decision, Annex I, for the types of projects supported.

4

                                                
potential bidder to confront their ideas before full proposals are formulated, so as to ascertain
the coherence with the eContent programme objectives.

Recommendation  4:  The  Commission  should  encourage  collaboration  and  networking
among the national contact points disseminating information about the programme aiming at
improving the quality of service provided.

Commission  comment.  The  Commission  takes  note  of  this  recommendation  and  will
continue  training  the  national  contact  points.  It  should  be  noted  that  national  contact  points
are  a  support  mechanism  to  inform  and  disseminate  potential  participants  established  and
financed  by  Member  States  and  participating  countries  in  line  with  the  principle  of
subsidiarity. As such the level of services provided as well as the resources put in place vary
depending on the allocation of funds in the different countries.

Main recommendations on a possible follow on programme

Recommendation 5: The contractor argues in favours of a need for a follow on programme.

Commission  comment.  The  Commission  takes  note  of  the  impact  analysis  of  the  current
programme as well as the wide consultation process undertaken by the contractor. As a result
of the evaluation, more than 2000 organisations the applied to the programme were surveyed,
with the aim of gathering information on their activities in the field of digital content.

Many respondents valued the European level support as an element allowing them to network
with similar or complimentary organisations beyond their national borders or as an incentive
to engage in cross-border collaboration.

The  Commission  recognised  digital  content  as  a  key  element  in  its  eEurope  2005
communication7  as  an  element  to  reduce  digital  divide  and  increase  the  use  of  global
networks. A proposal for a follow on programme is under consideration at present.

Recommendation 6: The contractor asks the Commission to maximise impact with a given
set of resources as well as restricting the potential target group.

Commission comment. The Commission shares the  view that  impact  should  be maximised
and some rationalisation of the activities should be undertaken. The Commission will detail in
its proposal the areas where added value at European level can be maximised. In particular,
the  Commission  supports  the  view  of  the  contractor  that  multilingual  and  multicultural
elements should be at the core of all projects supported, and not be the subject of a specific
action line.

A consultation process with industry is under way to single out areas where both the public
interest  element  and  the  priority  of  the  industry  converge  in  order  to  create  the  ground  for
effective public – private partnerships.

7

eEurope 2005: An information society for all, COM(2002) 263 final of 28 May 2002.

5

                                                
CONCLUSION

The Commission takes note of the findings and recommendations of the evaluation report on
the eContent programme. In the light of the Commission’s responses, it invites the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions to:

(1) 

(2) 

Recognise of the role of digital content as a means to increase access to information by
the  citizens  and  to  stimulate  the  economic  and  social  development  of  European
businesses.

Support the role of the eContent programme as supporting demonstrators for the reuse
of  public  sector  information  and  the  creation  of  European  multilingual  and
multicultural content.

6

ANNEX

Mid Term Evaluation of the

eContent Programme

Conducted for the European Commission

Technopolis Ltd

July 17th 2003

7

1.

INTRODUCTION

The eContent programme was developed by the European Commission8 to encourage growth
and development of the digital content industry in Europe. The programme began in 2001 and
will  run  until  2005.  With  a  budget  of  100  MEURO  the  programme  aims  to  stimulate  the
production, use and distribution of European digital content (e-content) on global networks. It
intends to do this by encouraging the growth of a healthy and competitive EU digital content
industry better able to exploit the opportunities created by new and emerging technologies.

There are three action lines in the programme:

–  Improving access to, and expanding the use of, Public Sector Information

–  Enhancing content production in a multilingual and multicultural environment

–  Increasing the dynamism of the digital content market

This  evaluation  was  carried  out  in  response  to  a  requirement  laid  down  in  the  Council
Decision adopted on the 22 December 2000. The evaluation was carried out over a six month
period (January -June 2003) by a trans-national consortium led by Technopolis Ltd.

Although  the  evaluation  takes  a  look  at  progress  by  the  mid-point  position,  an  important
additional  aim  of  the  study  is  to  consider  whether  the  programme  is  an  appropriate  policy
instrument  that  will  assist  the  European  digital  content  industry  in  overcoming  current  and
future innovation barriers. This in turn has allowed the development of recommendations on
whether, and in what form, the programme should be continued in future.

The  evaluation  covers  Calls  I  and  II  projects9 in  all  fifteen  Member  States  of  the  European
Union  and  including  the  three  EFTA-countries,  Norway,  Liechtenstein  and  Iceland.  The
accession countries were not included in the evaluation, because at the commencement of the
work  in  January  2003  few  of  them  had  signed  a  memorandum  of  understanding  with  the
Commission for  participation in the programme. However, in order to take into account the
likely future needs, preferences and  expectations of these countries,  some  representatives of
National Contact Points (NCPs)10 in the Accession States were interviewed.

2.

SUMMARY OF THE MAIN EVALUATION RESULTS

This summary and the accompanying recommendations form a précis of the evaluation. More
detailed  findings  and  associated  analyses  are  contained  in  the  main  body  of  the  report.  The
evaluation focuses on a series of six key questions.

8

9

10

See Council Decision of 22 December 2000, OJ L 14, 18.1.2001.
The  programme  is  implemented  mainly  through  calls  for  proposals,  requiring  interested  applicants  to
submit proposals for their projects within  a  given  period  of  time.  There  is  one  Call  per  year.  Call  III
started in December 2002.
National  Contact  Points  are  points  of  help  set  up  by  the  Member  States  in  order  to  market  the
programme  to  a  national  audience  as  well  as  to  assist  potential  participants  with  the  application
procedures.  Although  important  to  the  programme,  they  are  entirely  the  responsibility  of  Member
States.

8

                                                
2.1.

Was the intervention logic behind the programme effective?

‘Intervention  logic’  describes  the  relationship  between  the  programme  and  the  resources  it
uses, compared with the outputs and impacts which it has achieved. In short, there should be a
logical relationship between the overall programme goals, the operational goals, the concrete
results expected and the measures and activities designed to achieve these results. In order for
a  programme  to  be  effective,  the  intervention  logic  should  be  as  clear  as  possible,  as  a
‘muddy’ intervention logic can result in resources being allocated for measures which do not
enhance the overall goal of the programme.

A useful logical framework for demonstrating the effectiveness of the intervention logic is to
see a programme on a variety of different levels, as shown in Exhibit 1 below.

Exhibit 1: Interpretation of the intervention logic for the eContent programme

Overarching
Framework

Overall
programme goal

Operational
programme goals

(cid:1)  EEurope – Stimulating the use of and access for all to the Internet

(cid:1)  Enhancing the competitiveness of the European content industry by
supporting the production, use and distribution of European digital
content on the global networks

(cid:1)  Improving access to and expanding the use of commercially viable

Public Sector Information

(cid:1)  Promoting  cultural  diversity  and  multilingualism  by  enhancing
content production in a multilingual and multicultural environment

(cid:1)  Increasing the dynamism of the digital content market

Results

(cid:1)  Concrete  project  outputs  such  as  demonstrators  for  new  digital

products/services which are commercially viable

(cid:1)  Development of best practice models and methodologies

(cid:1)  Dissemination of results

(cid:1)  Fostering new partnerships

Activities

(cid:1)  Funding cooperative projects which

–  Have a short time to market

–  Develop solutions based on available technology

–  Build  on  a  multipartner,  multinational  and  multidisciplinary

approach

9

In  support  of  the  main  aims  of  the  programme,  eContent  provides  funding  for  projects  that
have  a  short  time-to-market,  develop  solutions  based  on  available  technology  and  aim  to
experiment  with  new  business  models  and  partnerships.  Accordingly  eContent  is  a  market
programme with a clear commercial angle and a strong emphasis is placed on the creation of
pan-European networks and partnerships.

The objectives stated by the Council Decision are much broader in scope, in that they have a
social  and  political  remit  that  transcends  the  boundaries  of  a  commercially  oriented
programme. Although these goals are not incompatible, it would make sense to put them into
a hierarchy in order to have clearly defined intervention logic. Otherwise, there is a danger of
having  a  ‘catch-all’  programme  -  attempting  to  achieve  too  great  a  variety  of  goals  within
comparatively limited resources.

The evaluators therefore contend that stimulating access and use of the  Internet provides the
overarching  framework  in  which  the  programme  is  embedded,  whereas  enhancing  the
competitiveness of the European digital content industry is the overall objective of eContent
which significantly contributes to that framework.  The prospect of future commercialisation
of  products  and  services  resulting  from  projects  acts  as  a  major  incentive  for  public  sector
organisations and universities/research institutes to draw together content on a European level
and to make it available to a wider public.

The  three  Action  Lines  should  be  seen  as  the  operational  goals  of  the  programme,  against
which  the  success  of  the  programme  should  be  measured.  The  choice  of  the  three  Action
Lines was considered sensible, given the fragmented nature of the industry and the breadth of
issues involved at the time. The programme focuses on one important and under-utilised form
of content, namely public sector content. It also points to a number of transverse issues that
hamper  the  development  of  digital  content  in  Europe,  such  as  multilinguality  and  Digital
Rights Management (DRM).

In order for the intervention logic to be sound, the operational goals have to contribute to the
overall programme goal of enhancing the competitiveness of the content industry, not merely
increasing the availability of content. Market orientation has to be a fundamental requirement
for  all  projects  from  the  beginning,  otherwise  there  is  a  danger  of  highly  relevant  and
interesting  content  not  being  used  efficiently  or  not  being  sufficiently  well  targeted  at
potential  users.  The  requirement  for  all  applicants  to  provide  sound  business  plans  upon
application was introduced in 2003. This is regarded as a justifiable and commendable change
to have made.

2.2.

What is the relevance of the programme?

The  eContent  programme  is  broadly  relevant  to  a  large  number  of  players  in  the  content
industry. However, the programme has particular relevance to a relatively small subset of the
content  industry.  These  are  mainly  companies  engaged  in  the  distribution  of  online  public
sector  content,  experts  in  localisation,  and  specialist  content  providers  within  public  bodies
and research organisations. The programme is also relevant to European businesses,  citizens
and users in that it increases the availability of valuable content to them. The importance of
the programme is amplified by the  fact that few national programmes were identified in the
European Member States that are directly comparable to eContent.

The relevance of the eContent programme differs for the various parties involved. The main
aspects are listed below:

10

Relevance of European content for SMEs

–  Increased access to commercially relevant information held by the public sector

–  Public-private  partnerships  ensure  that  SMEs  are  involved  in  the  conception,  packaging,

distribution and pricing of content from the beginning

–  Access to best practice guides on localisation, allowing SMEs to tailor their offerings more

efficiently to different target markets

–  Increased  opportunities  to  network  with  localisation  and  language  experts,  thus  tapping
into a pool of knowledge and business opportunities that have yet to be fully exploited

–  Disseminating their content at a European level

–  Increased knowledge on transverse matters such as Digital Rights Management and rights

trading

Relevance for the public sector

–  Increased opportunities to exploit content assets that are often otherwise hidden

–  Increased  service  levels  for  a  growing  number  of  citizens  and  businesses,  with

multilinguality helping to remove language barriers

–  Dissemination  of  content  to  a  wider  audience,  thus  promoting  the  notion  of  ‘open

government’

–  Market-friendly distribution of content due to public-private partnerships

–  Commercialisation as an opportunity for additional income

Relevance for universities and research institutes

–  Efficient exploitation of highly relevant, but fragmented, content

–  Dissemination of content to a wider audience

–  Increased  opportunities  to  bring  their  linguistic  and  localisation  knowledge  to  market

through networking with industry

–  Pooling of knowledge in order to speed up the solution of problems

–  Commercialisation as an opportunity for additional income

Relevance for European users

–  Increased availability of relevant content

–  Increased access through the reduction of language barriers

11

2.3.

Has the programme been managed efficiently?

When considering this question it is important to separate out the day-to-day management of
the  processes  involved  in  achieving  the  programme  goals  from  the  overall  ‘fit’  with  the
objectives  and  perceptions  of  the  Commission.  In  broad  terms,  the  questionnaire  survey  for
this evaluation has shown that the programme has been managed efficiently on both counts.
The detailed achievement of objectives is discussed elsewhere in this report.

Overall, participants showed a high level of satisfaction with the input they had received from
the  Commission  at  the  three  key  stages  of  pre-submission,  submission  and  project
management.  Whilst 
in  project
documentation,  feedback  and  payments,  the  Commission  should  be  complimented  on  their
achievement.

to  be  considered 

there  are  minor 

improvements 

The  legal  base  of  the  programme  proved  to  be  clear,  consistent  and  unambiguous  in  its
stipulation and requirements, in that it outlines the necessity for an eContent programme, sets
out  its  goals,  and  details  the  content  of  the  Action  Lines.  It  contains  all  the  information
necessary  for  the  Commission  to  implement  the  programme.  The  procedures  set  out  by  the
Council Decision have been followed closely by the Commission.

In  a  fast  changing  sector  such  as  eContent,  technical  and  market  conditions  can  change
rapidly and influence the potential for a commercial outcome to projects. The outcome of the
programme  could  be  better  assured  if  more  attention  was  paid  to  these  two  aspects  at  an
earlier stage in the course of projects. Whilst the project teams should ideally have these skills
available,  it  is  suggested  that  the  Commission  encourages  the  NCPs  to  provide  listings  of
experts  on  both  technological  and  commercial  matters  to  provide  an  external  view  where
necessary,  in  order  to  strengthen  this  aspect.  Similarly,  marketing  plans  for  the  outcome  of
projects were in many cases found to be dormant and should have been activated much earlier
in the process. The commercialisation and marketing aspects should receive special attention
by the Commission and their evaluators in project reviews.

The role played by NCPs in disseminating programme information was less clear in that they
were all established on different bases by Member States. As a consequence, some NCPs have
the  resources  and  prominence  to  be  highly  participative,  whereas  others  are  much  more
passive. Improvements in the networking and good practice of NCPs would result in a much
more useful network for existing and future users.

Regarding awareness activities, the dissemination of results - for example on websites - could
be improved to make them more ‘market friendly’. Specific market events could also benefit
from greater involvement with the commercial sector  to  again  encourage  commercialisation
activities early on in the process.

Overall, the programme was found to be well managed,  but  needing  greater  applied  market
focus to maximise the potential of its projects.

2.4.

Has the programme fulfilled the expectations of participants?

in  principle  been  well  understood  by  participants. 

The goals of the programme, particularly in relation to commercial  and networking aspects,
have 
‘Development  of  new
products/processes  and  services’  was  found  to  be  a  high-ranking  goal  for  all  participants.
Networking  goals  such  as  ‘access  to  complementary  expertise’  as  well  as  ‘formation  of
strategic  alliances’  were  also  ranked  very  high.  Goals  related  to  acquiring  knowledge  and

12

enhancing  in-house  learning  were  rated  lower.  Although  learning  was  an  important  project
outcome,  it  was  not  seen  as  a  primary  objective  of  the  projects.  The  low  ranking  of
‘technological risk sharing’ indicates a clear understanding that eContent is not intended as a
technology programme.

As may be expected, there were some marked distinctions among participant types regarding
goal prioritisation. Access to markets, customers and improved competitiveness were found to
be the most important to companies. For the public sector and universities, the dissemination
of  content  to  a  wider  audience  were  considered  central  goals.  The  development  of  an  end
product was seen as a high priority for all participant types.

The  results  also  showed  that  companies  have  different  expectations  from  networks  and
partnerships,  as  do  public  sector  organisations  and  universities.  While  networking  goals
overall  were  ranked  highly  by  all  participant  types,  companies  were  mainly  looking  for
complementary expertise, whereas public authorities and universities were more interested in
strategic alliances in order to disseminate their content to a wider audience.

Some  of  the  project  goals  have  been  attained  already,  despite  the  comparatively  short  time
that the programme has been in existence. This is especially true of networking goals, such as
‘formation of strategic alliances’ as well as ‘access to complementary expertise’. Thus, one of
the  main  goals  of  the  programme,  the  establishment  of  networks  across  different  types  of
players  in  the  market  has  not  only  been  classified  as  very  important  by  participants,  but  is
already showing a high degree of fulfilment.

Many  participants  expected  goals  relating  to  the  exploitation  of  project  outcomes  to  be
fulfilled only after the end of the project. This reflects the fact that commercialisation has not
received  much  attention  so  far,  indicating  that  the  commercial  impact  of  the  projects  could
take some time to materialise.

2.5.

What are the direct outputs of eContent, and how will they be commercialised?

A broad range of outputs has already been produced or, as indicated by participants, will be
produced  in  the  very  near  future.  Most  projects  are  well  under  way,  and  new  products  and
services are expected by the conclusion of the projects. The programme therefore appears set
to be successful in increasing the availability of digital content in Europe.

In  terms  of  commercial  exploitation,  which  is  one  of  the  main  goals  of  the  eContent
programme,  few  participants  had  so  far  made  concrete  plans  about  marketing,  sales
procedures,  target  customers,  and  revenue  models/volumes.  A  small  number  of  projects  are
already  in  pilot  phases,  actively  testing  an  early  version  of  their  end  product  with  potential
target customers. Most projects are however still at the feasibility phase, exploring potential
users’  needs  as  well  as  their  willingness  to  pay  for  an  eventual  product/service.  For  most
projects therefore, further time, effort and money will need to be spent on marketing studies,
pilot  phases  and  other  pre-launch  activities  before  potentially  commercial  outputs  may  be
expected.

Uncertainty  about  commercial  outcomes  is  an  unavoidable  aspect  of  the  innovation  process
and is not unusual even for market programmes. The fact that commercialisation was found to
be still at an early stage in most projects should temper the Commission’s  expectations that
outcomes  will  be  close  to  being  marketable  and  that  commercialisation  will  happen  shortly
after the end of the projects. To help alleviate this uncertainty, measures  should be taken to
support commercialisation aspects from a very early stage in projects. The early inclusion of

13

potential  business  users  and/or  distributors  in  the  projects  is  one  measure  that  would
strengthen  and  accelerate  commercial  exploitation.  If  the  needs  of  users  are  not  considered
early on in a project there is a danger that good content products will not be fully exploited,
products may not be designed appropriately and ‘time-to-market’ may be unnecessarily long.

2.6.

Have the goals of the programme been met?

Overall  the  goals  of  the  programme  are  very  broad  and  the  corresponding  resources  quite
limited.  It  would  therefore  be  unrealistic  to  expect  the  programme  to  have  a  far-reaching
impact. eContent should be perceived more as a demonstration programme, showcasing to the
European  content  industry  that  the  public  sector  holds  information  which  is  of  commercial
interest, that multilingualism is an important asset at a European/global level and that issues
such  as  Digital  Rights  Management  effectively  hamper  the  commercialisation  of  digital
content and therefore need to be resolved.

Improving access to and expanding the use of Public Sector Information

In the  field of Public Sector  Information,  the  programme  was  perceived  as  very  valid  in  its
progress to date. The projects that have been funded are interesting to wide groups of citizens
and businesses in Europe, and cover important topics such as land registry, geographical and
social  information,  environmental  data  and  patent  information.  The  projects  have  already
helped to resolve  important terminological, legal  and  conceptual  differences.  Many  of  these
projects  would  not  have  happened,  or  at  least  may  have  happened  in  a  more  limited  way
without  the  programme.  It  can  therefore  be  concluded  that  access  to,  and  availability  of,
Public  Sector  Information  have  both  been  improved  through  the  programme.  In  addition,
Action  Line  1  also  supports  legislative  and  policy  work  by  the  Commission  in  the  area  of
Public Sector Information.11

Whether  this  increased  availability  will  result  in  future  commercial  returns  is  difficult  to
establish at this point in time. At this stage of the programme it may be seen that some of the
projects  can  be  expected  to  show  significant  commercial  value  if  skilfully  packaged  and
distributed.  However,  the  fact  that  most  projects  have  not  yet  developed  a  scenario  for
exploitation – for some this was not required from the outset – means that some time will pass
before market opportunities for  European SMEs may result. As already suggested, the early
inclusion of business users and/or distributors in each project could shorten time-to-market for
public  sector  content  products  as  well  as  ensure  that  these  products  are  tailored  from  the
outset to the needs of potential users.

Summing  up  the  commercial  potential  of  Public  Sector  Information  (PSI)  as  funded  in  this
programme, the following observations may be made:

–  The public sector content most likely to create  revenue is to be found in the ‘business to
business’  (B2B)  realm.  Geographical,  land  information  etc.  which  can  be  used  by
businesses rather than by individual citizens has a higher commercial potential

11

See the “Green Paper on Public Sector Information in the Information Society”, published in January
1999,  and  “eEurope  2002:  Creating  an  EU  Framework  for  the  Exploitation  of  Public  Sector
Information”,  which  outline  an  orientation  for  the  Commission  on  the  reuse  and  commercial
exploitation  of  Public  Sector  Information.  A  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  the  reuse  and  commercial
exploitation  of  Public  Sector  Information  was  published  on  5th  June  2002.  These  documents  can  be
found on http://www.cordis.lu/eContent/psi/pubsec.htm

14

                                                
–  Some  conflict  of  interest  is  likely  to  occur  between  public  and  private  sectors  when
socially sensitive information,  such  as  medical  data,  is  involved.  A  major  element  in  the
success  or  failure  of  future  commercialisation  models  will  be  the  exact  nature  and
appropriateness  of  the  revenue  models  chosen.  With  socially  sensitive  information  in
particular,  the  public  sector  will  wish  to  remain  involved  in  decisions  on  who  will  have
access to the product and at what price.

–  In some cases, the public sector shows reluctance to exploit the use of content because it
may jeopardise potential revenue from their own PSI assets by allowing the private sector
to license it. Some public sector institutions prefer to continue commercialising content on
their own, or in conjunction with other public sector institutions, to avoid this risk

Enhancing content production in a multilingual and multicultural environment

The programme has helped to produce – or will help to produce in the near future – a series of
outputs conducive to,

–  Demonstrating the importance of localisation/multilinguality to European companies

–  Assisting content companies in localising their offerings, for example by providing advice,

best practice models, interactive guides and training models

–  Making  important  content  available  to  a  European  audience  in  a  variety  of  languages,

thereby ensuring more widespread access

–  Providing  effective  multilingual  retrieval  and  search  mechanisms  in  order  to  access

important content

Good quality outputs may therefore be expected as a result of the programme. In addition, by
bringing together multidisciplinary teams consisting of localisation service providers, owners
of  highly  specific  content,  specialist  consultants,  software  companies  and  international
associations  of content-related industries,  important  but  less  tangible  benefits  of  networking
and knowledge exchange have already been achieved by participants. By networking different
groups  of  players  working  in  different  fields  important  synergies  have  been  created  and
consequently added value for European content firms has been achieved.

The most important impact of Action Line 2 is that it has enhanced the notion of localisation
as a multicultural – not merely multilingual – phenomenon. It was made clear at the outset of
the  programme  that  projects  aimed  at  developing  translation  software  would  not  be
considered.  Localisation  is  still  widely  perceived  as  translation  by  participants.  The
programme  has  helped  to  redress  this  one-sided  understanding  and  has  provided  European
SMEs with a more valuable asset with which to operate in other national markets.

Action  Line  2,  however,  though  sensible  in  its  objective  is  presented  in  a  way  that  clearly
lacks focus, so the added impact that goes beyond the direct effect on participants will not be
as great as with Action Line 1. Action Line 2 addresses a very broad audience that has little in
common – virtually everyone who has something to do with multilinguality is encouraged to
participate.

This  diversity  is  not  in  wrong  in  principle,  as  it  reflects  the  diversity  and  the  fragmented
nature of the industry and a broad approach was certainly right at the time of the programme
conception and  launch.  Looking  to  the  future  however,  it  may  be  advisable  for  eContent  to
clarify  its  focus  (see  the  Recommendations  section).  Given  the  importance  of  the

15

demonstration aspect  of  the  programme  it  would  be sensible  to  clarify  the  focus in order  to
maximise the programme’s impact. A better defined focus would provide a clearer message to
more sharply defined user groups, rather than having a wider but more diffuse effect. With a
widespread  focus,  user  groups  and  target  markets  are  too  fragmented  for  the  programme  to
achieve critical mass which is key aspect of successful demonstration.

Increasing the dynamism of the digital content market

By covering a wide range of issues from access to capital to Digital Rights Management the
programme highlighted key structural elements of the industry. Some highly relevant projects
were funded, generally aimed at reducing some of the barriers to the commercial exploitation
of digital content.

Given the small size of this Action Line in terms of budget - only 15% of the overall eContent
budget goes to Action Line 3 - a broader impact could hardly be realistic. The value of this
Action Line lies in pointing towards ‘hot spots’ relevant to the industry, which are in need of
resolution on a pan-European level. The current focus of eContent on the exchange of good
practice,  the  build  up  of  a  strategic  overview  of  the  digital  content  market  and  the
dissemination  of  project  results  is  of  great  value,  given  the  demonstration  character  of  the
programme.

Some  additional  points  should  be  noted  when  considering  the  achievements  of  the
programme:

–  The programme has been successful in targeting SMEs. A substantial proportion (43%) of
participants consists of SMEs, with 16% having less than 10 employees and another 16%
between 10 and 49 employees. This is seen as a good result, as SMEs are  a prime group
that the Commission wished to attract.

–  The programme has been successful in creating and strengthening pan-European networks
and partnerships and has promoted the exchange of knowledge between different groups of
players.  Although  a  high  proportion  of  participants  knew  all  or  some  of  their  partners
before  participating  in  eContent,  the  programme  has  contributed  to  strengthening  these
networks.  In  addition,  the  networking  effect  can  be  expected  to  show  a  high  degree  of
sustainability  as  a  large  proportion  of  participants  indicated  that  they  plan  to  continue
working with some of their partners in future projects.

–  Although not an explicit goal of the programme, learning  effects have been  an  important
intangible outcome of eContent. The projects have helped organisations to approach their
own  work  in  a  more  structured  way  and  to  ‘bundle’  key  knowledge  elements  within  the
participating firms. Important learning effects can also be found in the intercultural realm,
where interesting and effective models of cross-border cooperation have been developed.

3.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The  report  chapter  on  recommendations  is  divided  into  two  sections.  The  first  focuses  on
suggested  improvements  for  the  current  programme,  the  second  examines  possibilities  for
modelling a future programme.

16

3.1.

Recommendations for the current programme

General recommendations for the Commission

–  The  Commission’s  financial  controls  require  that  financial  performance  be  evidenced  in
the  application  process.  Although  this  may  be  waived  for  applicants  who  are  in  start  up
situations  any  such  applicants  are  not  able  to  receive  advance  payments  –  arguably  the
principal  reason  for  start  up  business  getting  involved  in  programmes  such  as  eContent.
The  Commission  should  review  its  application  requirements  in  order  that  start  up
businesses may be better able to receive support from programmes targeted in whole or in
part at these very businesses

Financial  procedures  should  be  improved  such  that  participant  organisations  receive
payments,  especially  advance  payments,  in  a  shorter  time  -  ideally  within  60  days  after  the
signature  of  the  contract.  Payments  delays  were  often  commented  upon  by  participating
businesses. They are particularly damaging for SMEs, whose participation in the programme,
if not their very existence may be threatened through late payment.

Recommendations to the EC programme management

–  Commercial market focus should be emphasised as an important aspect that should run in
parallel with project development rather than at the end of it. Apart from the requirement to
present  a  sound  business  plan  upon  application,  the  inclusion  of  business  users/content
distributors  –  although  practically  it  cannot  be  made  compulsory  –  should  be  considered
positively  in  the  selection  process.  Similarly,  greater  commercial  focus  should  be
introduced at promotional events.

–  The system of feedback to successful and unsuccessful bidders should be reviewed in order
to  improve  quality  and  consistency.  Similarly,  standardised  forms  and  completion
requirements are recommended. Further training of evaluators in these respects should also
be considered.

–  Programme documentation should be reviewed in order to improve clarity and consistency
and  to  simplify  them  for  users  within  the  constraints  of  the  Commission’s  internal
procedural requirements.

–  The programme web site should be recognised as one of the principal means of access for
the  programme.  It  should  be  reviewed  with  this  in  mind,  with  a  view  to  clarifying  the
structure and content.

–  The  Commission  should  encourage  the  introduction  of  good  practice  networking  events
between  NCPs as supporting actions  to  the  programme.  These  actions  should  be  entirely
driven by the NCPs with participation from the Commission and should aim at improving
the quality and consistency of services offered by the European network of NCPs.

–  Commission staffing levels for the programme  should be  considered in  the  light of these
recommendations in order that the high quality of service evidenced by the survey may be
maintained or improved.

17

Recommendations for Member States

–  Member States are encouraged to promote the commercial value of content as well as the
importance  of  multilinguality  as  much  as  possible.  This  could  be  achieved  through
presenting examples of successful eContent projects at events, on ICT-related government
websites and by considering the goals of eContent in national strategies and programmes.
This would ensure that the eContent programme has a wider impact and that its message is
transmitted to all relevant stakeholders in the Member States.

–  To ensure continuous support for the development of digital content, Member States could
increasingly consider content-related activities in their own national funding programmes,
or if necessary set up new national programmes similar in principle to eContent.

Recommendations for NCPs

–  NCPs  should  be  further  encouraged  to  provide  demonstrations  of  good  practice  at
information  days.  In  addition,  bilateral  meetings  held  at  information  days  should  be
continued  and  should  become  an  integral  part  of  these  events.  This  would  enhance  the
quality of proposals submitted to the Commission in providing potential participants with a
clearer idea on which projects have a better chance of success, or by signposting them to
other programmes.

–  NCPs should establish and continuously update lists of national experts in fields relevant to
eContent  projects  in  their  respective  countries.  Ideally,  experts  should  be  submitted  to  a
quality  check  before  being  added  to  the  list,  but  there  can  be  no  liability  on  the  part  of
NCPs. Upon request, names and contact details of relevant experts should be provided to
participants  in  order  to  assist  them  in  tackling  commercial  and  technological  issues  that
might arise during the course of their projects.

–  NCPs should increasingly engage in joint networking activities in order to improve service
offerings.  This  could  include  regular  meetings,  exchange  of  good  practice,  workshops,
standardisation of services offered, marketing, data collection etc. Joint networking events
could also highlight the need for more national backing in some member states.

3.2.

Recommendations for a follow-on programme

3.2.1.

The case for ‘eContent II’

It  is  a  conclusion  of  this  evaluation  that  there  is  already  a  definite  need  for  a  follow-on
programme.  The  contextual  environment  for  digital  content  has  changed  since  the
programme’s inception. Prices for basic telecommunication services and high bandwidth lines
in Europe - which were singled out as a major disincentive to the use of content-rich digital
services and the development of a mass market in the ex-ante evaluation for the programme -
have  fallen  substantially  in  recent  years.  Legal  issues,  such  as  the  protection  of  Intellectual
Property  Rights,  have  been  addressed  by  a  series  of  national  and  European  initiatives,  the
most important one being the EU Copyright Directive. Alongside these developments recent
disenchantment with the Internet economy has caused many companies to reduce investment
in activities related to e-business and digital content.

In  spite  of  these  issues  it  is  the  view  of  the  evaluators  that  the  case  for  an  ‘eContent  II’
programme remains strong for the following reasons:

18

Firstly, despite the changes in the regulatory and business environment, many of the barriers
that  led  to  the  creation  of  the  eContent  programme  still  persist.  The  exploitation  of  Public
Sector Information is still hampered by a series of legislative and conceptual barriers, which
will take considerable time to change. Localisation is still seen mainly in terms of translation
rather  than  adaptation  to  local  markets,  reducing  the  chances  of  European  SME  success  in
foreign markets.

Secondly,  further  networking  activities  still  need  to  be  encouraged  to  bring  together  the
European  content  and  language  industries  in  order  to  improve  the  design,  production  and
distribution  of  high-quality  content  in  an  increasingly  multilingual  and  multicultural
environment.  This  need  will  be  further  amplified  through  the  enlargement  of  the  European
Union that will involve countries with very different cultural and linguistic requirements.

Thirdly, the commercial value of digital content has not yet been sufficiently demonstrated in
order to ensure that Europe will catch up with key competitors such as the USA. Commercial
success of projects under the current eContent programme is uncertain in most cases, giving
rise  to  the  need  for  a  continuation  of  the  programme  with  a  stronger  commercial  focus  to
enhance the competitiveness of the digital content industry in the longer term.

Finally,  increased  caution  on  the  part  of  venture  capitalists  and  banks  in  funding  content-
related projects means that the eContent sector is less able to access capital in order to reach
its  full  potential.  A  follow-on  eContent  programme  would  be  an  essential  step  towards
providing  sound  business  models  for  content  services  and  reducing  the  costs  of  creating
content suitable for the European market.

3.2.2.

The case for a more clearly defined focus

As  pointed  out  in  the  conclusions,  the  Action  Lines  for  the  current  programme  were  well
chosen  and  relevant  for  participants  as  well  as  for  a  wider  group  of  players  in  the  content
industry.  The  fragmented  nature  of  the  industry,  which  includes  a  highly  diverse  set  of
players,  as  well  as  its  ‘newness’  at  the  time  of  the  inception  of  the  programme  required  an
approach which was as broad as possible. It is strongly recommended however that any future
programme should be more focused in terms of participants as well as disciplines. The content
industry is more mature than it was when the programme began, although there is not  yet a
universal classification, the industry’s profile has become more recognised in that it is clearly
distinguished  from  the  goods-producing  or  service  industries.  A  stronger,  more  clearly
defined programme focus would have two major advantages:

–  Firstly, there is the argument of impact. A funding programme, in order to be as effective
as possible, aims to maximise impact on a group of actors beyond the direct participants of
a  programme.  It  should  aim  to  achieve  a  longer-term  change  of  behaviour,  such  as  the
reallocation  of  financial  and  human  resources  to  new  technology  and/or  business  areas.
With  a  widespread  focus,  user  groups  and  target  markets  are  too  fragmented  for  a
programme to achieve critical mass, which is a critical factor in successful demonstration.
Given the importance of the demonstration aspect of the eContent programme, it would be
sensible  to  narrow  down  the  focus  in  order  to  maximise  its  impact.  A  narrower  focus
would provide a clearer message to more sharply defined user groups rather than having a
wider, but more diffuse effect.

19

–  Secondly,  a  narrower  focus  will  make  it  easier  to  communicate  and  administer  the
programme  in  that  it  will  allow  better  targeting  of  potential  participants  or  groups  of
participants.  This  would  potentially  result  in  fewer,  more  targeted  proposals  and  would
allow better focusing of awareness and dissemination measures.

3.2.3.

A possible profile for ‘eContent II’

A future programme could evolve around a series of issues, which, according to the views of
stakeholders  and  from  the  experience  of  the  evaluators,  are  vital  for  the  development  of
European digital content. ‘eContent II’ could focus on using content for:

Broadening learning: This would focus on projects aiming at cross-fertilisation between the
public  sector,  universities/research  institutes  and  companies.  Examples  could  be  the
development of content for Virtual and Learning Environments (VLEs) for higher and further
education as well as developing content to enhance organisational learning. Coordination with
the e-learning initiative of DG Education and Culture will be necessary.

Wider  use  of  Public  Sector  Information  (PSI):  Through  the  present  programme  PSI  has
been shown as a commercially viable product, an aspect that needs further promotion within
the  European  Union.  Geographical  and  meteorological  information  as  well  as  business  data
have so far proven to be the front-runners. This section of the programme could fund projects
aiming  to  develop  and  commercially  exploit  pan-European  PSI.  All  projects  should  be
required  to  provide  a  sound  business  plan  upon  application  in  order  to  increase  the
commercial focus – a focus that should then be pursued throughout the course of the project.

Broadening  the  European  digital  content  knowledge  base:  This  section  could  include  a
series of accompanying measures aimed at highlighting transverse issues, such as market and
technology  studies,  best  practice  studies,  networking  events,  as  well  as  information  and
dissemination measures.

Using technology as a means of exploiting the content base: It is important that companies
and  organisations  in  the  eContent  sector  are  able  to  develop  and  capitalise  on  the  use  of
enabling technologies that enhance the speed, availability and lower the cost of eContent use.
This aspect would focus on the use of new technology in relation to eContent, but would of
course avoid any duplication with other Commission research and technology programmes

The two overarching requirements for all projects, regardless of the section in which they are
being submitted, should be commercialisation and ‘Europeanisation’.

Commercialisation

–  The  commercial  viability  of  all  projects  should  be  demonstrated  as  far  as  possible  at  the
outset.  A  business  plan,  which  is,  as  detailed  as  possible,  including  commercialisation
aspects, should be provided upon application.

–  All projects (perhaps with the exception of accompanying measures) should be required to
have  public-private  partnerships  at  their  core.  This  will  ensure  that  commercialisation  is
thought of at an early stage of the projects and that products are more tailored to the needs
of the market from the outset.

–  Potential business users and/or distributors should be included at a very early stage of the
project. Projects that have a high market potential and the demonstrable interest of future
user groups should be favoured.

20

‘Europeanisation’

–  European  value  added:  Projects  should  be  of  interest  to  a  wide  group  of  European
businesses and private users, at the same  time  enhancing  European cultural  diversity  and
highlighting issues of common concern, for example environmental issues, localisation and
best practice.

–  Instead  of  being  treated  in  a  separate  Action  Line,  multilinguality  should  become  an
integral part of all projects, be it in the form of providing multilingual access or installing
multilingual search mechanisms. By integrating multilinguality into all projects its purpose
as  a  means  to  an  end  rather  than  a  stand-alone  measure  is  more  clearly  demonstrated.  If
pan-European  content  is  to  be  successful  in  market  terms,  multilingual  access  is
indispensable.

Additional aspects

In addition to these requirements, any new programme should increase the emphasis on both
the  use  of  mobile  and  other  devices  to  access  eContent  and  the  development  of  eContent
products  for  these  devices.  This  aspect  was  already  present  in  Call  II  of  the  current
programme, but the emphasis should be expanded. Given recent developments in the mobile
communications industry, the distribution of content on mobile devices will be of significant
future  importance  to  the  sector12.  Increased  flexibility  in  the  distribution  of  content  will
contribute  to  making  content  more  interesting  for  a  wider  group  of  market  players,  thus
enhancing its commercial potential.

The  current  approach  of  using  Demonstration  Projects  and  Definition  Phase  (or  Feasibility)
Projects  based  on  transnational  consortia  should  be  continued.  Experience  shows  that  in
market programmes the funding of concrete projects aiming at producing demonstrators - or
checking  the  feasibility  of  doing  so  -  has  proven  to  be  most  valuable.  Measures  aimed  at
enhancing  training  and  skills  development  are  also  valuable,  but  they  would  be  beyond  the
means of the programme if funding remained at current levels.

Accompanying measures consisting of market and technology studies as well as best practice
guides could also contribute to the build-up of relevant skills. This is especially important for
the  phase  after  project  completion  in  order  to  ensure  that  project  outcomes  are  successfully
commercialised  in  the  market  place.  Studies  on  successful  commercialisation  could  be
financed to achieve this goal. In addition, the Commission should encourage NCPs to provide
listings  of  qualified  experts  who  could  assist  users  from  demonstrators  through  to  final
products.

All  of  these  measures  will  of  course  have  an  impact  on  funding  levels.  Along  with  any
changes in focus there is also the question of the volume of projects that could be funded if
more  budget  was  made  available.  Whilst  this  is  a  question  for  the  Commission  to  resolve
against  other  equally  demanding  programmes,  a  substantial  budgetary  increase  is  strongly
recommend, given the scale and importance of the global eContent industry both now and in
the foreseeable future.

12

See  Digital  Content  for  Global  Mobile  Services.  Report  prepared  for  the  European  Commission  by
Andersen Consulting, 2000 This report can be found on www.cordis.lu/eContent/studies/studies.htm.

21