Communication from the Commission to the European Council -  Implementing the renewed partnership for growth and jobs - Developing a knowledge flagship : the European Institute of Technology
Date: 2006-02-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Employment Strategy, economic and social cohesion, economic growth, education, research and development, research body, technology, technology park

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 22.2.2006 
COM(2006) 77 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL 

Implementing the renewed partnership for growth and jobs 

Developing a knowledge flagship: the European Institute of Technology 

. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
Executive Summary 

The proposal to establish a European Institute of Technology was put forward in 2005, in the 
mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy. It has been further developed on the basis of a public 
consultation which attracted a wide range of valuable contributions. 

Although  in  recent  years  many  initiatives  have  been  launched  at  national  and  EU  levels  to 
strengthen  the  capacities  of  the  higher  education,  research  and  innovation  sectors,  and  the 
links  between  them,  there  is  still  much  to  be  done.  Europe  still  falls  short  in  turning  R&D 
results  into  commercial  opportunities,  developing  a  concentration  of  human,  financial  and 
physical  resources  in  research  and  higher  education,  promoting  an  innovation  and 
entrepreneurial culture in research and education, as well as in setting up new organisational 
models suited to today’s needs. 

The EIT will be an education, research and innovation operator. It will be structured so as to 
integrate  these  three  areas,  which  between  them  hold  the  keys  to  the  knowledge  society.  It 
will set out to attract and keep the best talents in students, researchers and staff in Europe, to 
work  side  by  side  with  leading  edge  business  in  the  development  and  exploitation  of 
knowledge  and  research,  and  to  enhance  research  and  innovation  management  skills 
generally.  

In particular, it will be designed:  

•  To  integrate  teams  from  universities,  research  centres  and  companies  in  its  structure  and 

operations; 

•  To have resources seconded (not just networked) from existing organisations so that they 

become legally part of the EIT and can jointly develop an integrated strategy; 

•  To  have  a  Governing  Board  drawn  from  the  highest  levels  of  the  scientific  and  business 

communities; 

•  Not  to  be  constrained  by  the  boundaries  and  obstacles  which  contribute  to  the 

fragmentation of European higher education and research today. 

It will bring particular added value in three ways: 

•  It  will  offer  the  private  sector  a  new  relationship  with  education  and  research.  This  will 
bring  new  opportunities  for  the  commercialisation  of  research  and  a  closer  two-way 
exchange. The integration of teams from universities, research centres and companies will 
give it an edge over traditionally organised universities. It will also bring opportunities to 
attract private finance to the EIT. 

•  It  will  concentrate  on  combining  the  three  sides  of  the  knowledge  triangle  –  education, 
research and innovation. They will be inseparably linked, because of the EIT’s nature and 
its mix of partners. This will direct its activities into new and more productive directions. 

•  It  will  represent  a  concentration  of  resources,  and  thus  be  able  to  match  the  highest 

standards achieved elsewhere.  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
Setting up the EIT will require the adoption of a legal instrument, which the Commission will 
propose later in 2006 (together with an extensive impact assessment). This will give the EIT 
its  own  legal  personality  and  independence  from  national  regulation.  It  will  provide  the 
framework  to  allow  proper  management  and  the  necessary  accountability  to  the  EU 
institutions.  

Funding will be provided by different sources including the EU, the Member States and the 
business community.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION  

Improving  the  relationship  between  education,  research  and  innovation  –  and  specifically 
their contribution to economic growth, employment and social cohesion – is fundamental in 
enhancing  the  competitiveness  of  the  EU.  It  is  a  common  perception  that  in  Europe,  this 
relationship does not work as well as it could; and this perception led the Commission to put 
forward a new initiative in its 2005 Spring Report: 

“In  order  to  reinforce  our  commitment  to  knowledge  as  a  key  to  growth,  the  Commission 
proposes the creation of a “European Institute of Technology” to act as a pole of attraction 
for the very best minds, ideas and companies from around the World”1 

The  European  Council  took  note  of  this  proposal  at  the  2005  Spring  Summit.  In  October 
2005,  at  the  Hampton  Court  informal  meeting,  it  called  for  urgent  action  to  achieve  world-
class excellence in both research and education. The need for action to reinforce the quality of 
European  innovation  systems  and  remain  competitive  on  the  global  scene  is  further 
documented  in  the  Commission’s  2006  Annual  Progress  Report  on  the  Strategy  for  Growth 
and Jobs2.  

This Communication takes up the idea of a European Institute of Technology (EIT). It follows 
a  wide  public  consultation,  in  which  the  most  important  university,  research,  business  and 
industrial innovation organisations took part, along with numerous individuals from each of 
these sectors. It gives a description of the way the EIT might work, and the way it should be 
developed. A more detailed impact assessment extended to include a full examination of the 
legal and financial implications will follow later this year. 

2. 

MAKING  A  SUCCESS  OF  THE  KNOWLEDGE  TRIANGLE  -  THE  CASE  FOR  A  NEW 
INITIATIVE 

During 2005 the Commission organised a comprehensive consultation process about a future 
EIT,  with  brainstorming  meetings  and  position  papers  from  university,  research  and 
innovation organisations. The results of the public consultation are presented and analysed in 
details  in  a  separate  Commission  staff  working  document3.  They  cover  issues  such  as  the 
mission and objectives of the EIT, its structure and priorities. 

There has been general agreement that the core challenge faced by the EU in the innovation 
area lies in its inability to fully exploit and share R&D results and consequently to translate 
them into economic and societal values. Europe should not only develop the three corners of 
its  “knowledge  triangle”  (education,  research  and  innovation),  but  reinforce  the  bridges 
between them. This also echoes the findings of the expert group on R&D and innovation4. 

1 

2 
3 

4 

COM(2005)24,  “Working  Together  for  Growth  and  Jobs:  a  New  Start  for  the  Lisbon  Strategy”, 
par. 3.3.2.  
COM(2006)30, “Time to move up a gear: the new partnership for growth and jobs”. 
See  the  forthcoming  Commission  Staff Working  Paper  on  “Results  of  the  Public  Consultation  on  the 
Concept of a European Institute of Technology”. 
“Creating  an  innovative  Europe”,  Report  of  the  independent  expert  group  on  R&D  and  innovation 
appointed following the Hampton Court Summit, January 2006. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Within this common diagnosis a wide range of causes appear. On the knowledge supply side, 
both the quality and the usability of knowledge outcomes are criticised. In particular, the gap 
between  research  outcomes  and  their  application  is  still  wide5.  These  two  issues  cannot  be 
considered separately.  Although its  general level of university performance  is  good, Europe 
needs more excellence6, because of  its important societal and  economic impacts. It  nurtures 
the  circulation  of  talents,  attracts  private  R&D  investment,  and  helps  the  discovery  of  ideas 
able  to  produce  widespread  knowledge  spill-over  effects.  But  if  excellence  is  to  flourish, 
researchers also need to have an access to environments in which selection as well as career is 
based on competition, paying for performance is not a taboo, and engaging in business is seen 
positively  as  an  important  learning  opportunity  in  a  researcher’s  curriculum.  This  in  turn 
needs new ways of working together. 

A critical concentration of human, financial, and physical resources is needed to create a 
virtuous circle in which talented faculty, researchers and students attract both each other and 
competitive funding from private and public sectors. At present, universities in Europe have 
very similar ambitions, but their efforts are too dispersed. There are nearly 2,000 universities 
in  the  EU  aspiring  to  be  research-active.  While  not  wholly  comparable,  less  than  10%  of 
higher education institutions in the US award postgraduate degrees and even fewer claim to 
be research-intensive universities7. Given the lower level of education and R&D spending in 
Europe  compared  to  the  US8,  in  Europe  there  are  more  actors  seeking  a  slice  of  a  smaller 
cake.  The  US  arrangement  leads  to  a  concentration  of  resources  and  people  that  achieves 
critical mass in those few institutions concerned9, and helps them to be amongst the best in the 
world.  It  is  not  pure  chance  that  both  EU  R&D  companies  spending  and  EU  talents  are 
drained  by  US  or  other  international  competitors10,  and  that  few  EU  universities  are 
mentioned in the world’s most-quoted international rankings of universities.  

At the same time, there is not enough demand in Europe for research outcomes. Even if more 
excellent  research  products  or  capacities  were  available,  it  is  unlikely  that  their  commercial 
value would be exploited. A major reason for this weakness is the cultural and intellectual gap 
between researchers and entrepreneurs11. Innovation needs a mutual learning process based on 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

According  to  the  Innovation  Scoreboard  2005,  the  innovation  gap  between  Europe,  Japan  and  US  is 
increasing.  It  would  take  more  than  50  years  for  the  EU  25  to  catch  up  the  US  level  of  innovation 
performance.  
Europe  needs  to  reinforce  its  presence  in  the  higher  level  of  scientific  excellence.  For  example, 
according  to  the  Shanghai  Academic  Ranking  of  world  Universities,  although  within  the  Top  500 
worldwide universities there are 205 based in Europe (compared to 198 in the US), within the Top 20 
there are just 2 European universities (compared to 17 based in the US).  
Out of some 3300 degree-awarding bodies in the US, about 215 award post-graduate degrees. There are 
fewer than 100 recognised general research-intensive universities in the US. 
In 2004, EU R&D intensity was 1.90% (R&D expenditure/GDP), well below the US (2003: 2.59%) and 
Japan (2003: 3.15%). See also Eurostat press release 156/2005 of 6 December 2005. 
In the US 95% of federal university research funding is spent in nearly 200 universities out of a total of 
3.300 (S&E Indicators, National Science Foundation, 2004). 
Europe benefits less from the increased globalisation of R&D than its main competitors. Over the years 
1997  2002,  R&D  expenditure  by  EU  companies  in  the  US  increased  in  real  terms  much  faster  than 
R&D  expenditure by  US  firms  in  the  EU (+54  %  against  +38  %). Emerging  countries  like  India  and 
China are those that benefit more from US R&D outflows. Key Figures 2005 on Science, Technology 
and Innovation: Towards a European Knowledge Area, European Commission. 
This gap is visible in the difference between the numbers of researchers employed in the private sector 
in the EU and elsewhere. In the US, four out of five researchers are working in the business sectors as 
are  two  out  of  three  researchers  in  Japan.  In  the  EU,  just  under  half  of  all  researchers  work  in  the 
business sector.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
trust,  not  just  a  transfer  of  knowledge  at  the  end  of  a  research  endeavour.  In  this  respect, 
entrepreneurs,  especially  in  SMEs,  need  to  acquire  a  research/innovation  culture  and  be 
encouraged  to  take  risks;  and  academics  and  researchers  need  to  understand  and  develop 
entrepreneurial skills. More cooperation can offset SMEs’ lack of critical mass and release the 
positive potential of SMEs in terms of flexibility and creativity. The public sector can play its 
part: public research, Intellectual Property Rights and innovative research procurement can all 
stimulate a more effective and productive relationship between research and business. 

In recent years a range of European initiatives has been launched to strengthen the capacities 
of  the  research,  education  and  innovation  sectors.  Mobility  schemes  such  as  the  Erasmus 
programme  have  also  enabled  students  and  staff  to  experience  a  variety  of  learning  and 
training contexts, exposing them to the wealth and diversity of knowledge that characterizes 
the  European  landscape.  The  Community  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  have 
contributed substantially through initiatives such as Marie Curie actions, Integrated Projects, 
Networks of Excellence, the promotion of European Technology Platforms. The forthcoming 
European Research Council, will support investigator-driven frontier research of the highest 
quality. These achievements have helped create a context in which EU universities, research 
centres, enterprises, and public actors can collaborate more easily.  

But potential is still unfulfilled and Europe should reinforce its position in the most strategic 
areas. This could be remedied by a pooling and concentration of resources: and this requires a 
dynamic and flexible institutional setting, open to change and newcomers, and able to tackle 
trans-  and  inter-disciplinary  work  and  to  develop  productive  synergy  between  education, 
research and innovation.  

This sort of change will no doubt take place in existing organisations; but it will face inertia 
and  it  will  take  time.  It  needs  a  fresh  approach  to  bridging  the  gap  between  science  and 
society,  to  act  as  a  reference  model  to  inspire  and  guide  long  term  change.  To  this  end,  a 
public consultation took place on the basis of four options:  

(1) 

A single institution; 

(2) 

A small-network; 

(3) 

A large network; 

(4) 

An EIT labelling scheme. 

Whilst  there  was  a  majority  opinion  in  favour  of  a  network  of  some  kind,  one  quarter  of 
respondents wanted a single institution (not meaning a single site) and concern was expressed 
that a fixed network of universities would offer neither the flexibility and openness required 
nor a sufficient level of integration. Nor would it reflect the fact that excellence often lies in 
individual departments or teams, not whole universities.12  

The model for an EIT described here meets these concerns: it would allow for the best teams 
in strategic fields to be brought together in a way that benefits both them and their original 
host institutions. It will bring particular added value in three ways: 

12 

See  the  forthcoming  Commission  Staff Working  Paper  on  “Results  of  the  Public  Consultation  on  the 
Concept of a European Institute of Technology”. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  It  will  offer  the  private  sector  a  new  relationship  with  education  and  research.  This  will 
bring  new  opportunities  for  the  commercialisation  of  research  and  a  closer  two-way 
exchange.  The  integration  of  universities,  research  centres  and  companies  will  give  it  an 
edge  over  traditionally  organised  universities.  It  will  also  bring  opportunities  to  attract 
private finance to the EIT. 

•  It  will  concentrate  on  combining  three  sides  of  the  knowledge  triangle  –  education, 
research and innovation. They will be inseparably linked, because of the EIT’s nature and 
its mix of partners. This will direct its teaching and its research into new and industrially 
productive directions. 

•  It  will  represent  a  concentration  of  resources,  and  thus  be  able  to  match  the  highest 
standards achieved elsewhere. It will have no obligation to undertake actions which fail to 
meet the criterion of excellence. 

3. 

HOW WOULD THE EIT WORK? 

The  EIT  will  have  its  own  distinctive  place.  It  will  perform  a  role  unlike  any  existing  or 
planned  EU  initiative.  It  will  become  a  high-profile  centre  of  global  excellence,  capable  of 
attracting  high  calibre  students  and  researchers,  promoting  cutting-edge  innovation  and 
research  in  trans-  and  inter-disciplinary  fields,  and  leveraging  competitive  funding  from 
private and public sectors world-wide.  

To  achieve  this,  the  EIT  should  have  a  strong  identity  as  was  also  highlighted  by  the 
responses to the consultation. The EIT should become a clear and visible European brand and 
be recognized in its own right on the global scene. The EIT also needs autonomy: through its 
governance,  through  the  primacy  of  excellence  in  its  selection,  monitoring  and  evaluation 
processes, and through its funding. 

The EIT’s mission would be:  

•  To perform postgraduate education, research and innovation in emerging trans- and inter-

disciplinary fields 

•  To develop research and innovation management skills 

•  To attract the best researchers and students world wide 

•  To disseminate new organizational and governance models  

•  To mark the knowledge landscape with a new European identity 

3.1. 

Role and missions of the EIT 

The activities of the EIT would include all three parts of the knowledge triangle: 

•  education:  the  EIT’s  distinctive  education  model  would  attract  MA  students  and  PhD 
candidates  and  would  be  responsible  for  giving  them  an  education  at  the  highest 
international standard;  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
•  research:  carrying  out  research  activities  from  basic  to  applied  research  but  with  a 
particular industry  focus,  concentrating  on  trans-  or  inter-disciplinary  areas  with a  strong 
innovation potential; 

•  innovation:  the  EIT  would  develop  from  the  outset  strong  links  with  the  business 
community  that  would  ensure  that  its  work  was  appropriate  to  market  needs,  and  would 
help  orient  its  research  and  education  activities  in  directions  useful  to  the  economy  and 
society. 

In all these areas, the EIT would draw on excellence where it now exists, and encourage its 
development where it does not.  

The different actors in the EIT would all play a part in this. 

•  Very few universities in Europe today are excellent across the board. But many individual 
departments  or  teams  are  recognised  as  excellent  in  their  own  fields.  The  EIT  would 
unlock  the  potential  of  these  departments  and  teams  by  bringing  them  together. 
Participation in the EIT would therefore be at departmental, not at university, level. 

•  For staff, excellence of results is often not the deciding factor in determining remuneration 
or  promotion  prospects  for  those  who  work  in  universities  or  research  centres.  The  EIT 
should  provide  a  genuinely  excellence-driven  context,  where  incentives  would  match 
objectives,  remuneration  is  performance-based,  and  which  would  be  a  more  effective 
partner to industry and model for change.  

•  Many  companies,  particularly  SMEs,  lack  organised  cooperation  with  universities  and 
research,  with  the  result  that  entrepreneurs  and  researchers  may  not  share  a  common 
culture. The EIT should provide a context in which the two can come together and develop 
mutual understanding.  

This  focus  on  excellence  requires  a  new  approach  to  funding.  Today  many  universities  in 
Europe are essentially public services. They are mainly funded by the taxpayer and generally 
involve limited financial commitment by other stakeholders. Although such universities have 
proven  their  worth  and  will  continue  to  play  their  role,  the  EIT  should  be  overtly  different: 
from the very start it should be set up to receive funding from both public and private sectors. 

Such a support base will be central to two key measures of the EIT’s success. First, its ability 
to  convince  the  private  sector  that  it  can  deliver  commercially  relevant  results.  Second,  the 
extent to which the universities and policy-makers take up the EIT model as a successful new 
organisational structure for universities. 

3.2. 

Structure of the EIT 

The scientific heart of the EIT will lie in its education, research and innovation work, and in 
its  capacity  to  integrate  contributions  from  different  partners  and  build  them  into  a  single 
structure  which  will  be  greater  than  the  sum  of  its  parts.  It  will  do  this  through  a  series  of 
integrated  partnerships  with  existing  universities,  research  centres  or  companies  (‘partner 
organisations’), creating “knowledge communities”. They will be selected by and accountable 
to the Governing Board of the EIT. A fundamental difference between an ordinary ‘network’ 
and  these  knowledge  communities  is  that  while  in  ordinary  networks,  the  partners  merely 
agree  to  cooperate,  in  the  EIT  knowledge  communities,  they  will  second  resources  – 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
infrastructure, staff, equipment – to the EIT. Knowledge communities are themselves legally 
part of the EIT. 

3.2.1.  The EIT’s Governing Board and central core 

The  EIT’s  governance  needs  to  combine  a  light  hand  with  sure  guidance.  It  will  be 
responsible  for  the  EIT  ‘brand’  –  for  ensuring  that  the  choices  made  (for  example,  on  the 
areas  in  which  to  work)  reflect  the  best  available  perspective  on  science  and  business;  that 
selections  are  quality-based;  and  that  its  scientific/business  agenda  is  widely  accepted.  The 
Governing Board should be of the highest calibre and will be drawn from the actors outlined 
in Section 3.1. above. 

It  should  not  aim  to  be  representative  of  existing  European  institutions  and  should  be 
organised so as to be balanced in terms of the experience represented, and operational in the 
way it works. It would have a direct responsibility for:  

–  setting the strategic priorities for the EIT; 

–  managing the central budget and allocating resources to the knowledge communities; 

–  ensuring excellence within the EIT; 

–  organising the selection, monitoring and evaluation of the knowledge communities; 

–  having strategic oversight of the knowledge/IPR portfolios. 

3.2.2.  The knowledge communities 

The knowledge communities will consist of departments or teams from universities, research 
centres  or  companies  which  come  together  as  an  integrated  partnership  to  undertake  jointly 
post-graduate  education  (i.e.,  MA  and  PhD  levels  only),  research  and  innovation  activities. 
They will pool together resources of different kinds: personnel and infrastructure seconded to 
the knowledge communities by the partner organisations and financial resources from public 
and  private  sources.  They  will  use  these  resources  to  create  high-level  critical  mass  and  to 
pool education, research and innovation excellence in their own field. The physical resources 
will  remain  geographically  dispersed,  but  the  knowledge  community  will  operate  as  an 
integrated whole. 

Knowledge  communities  will  specialise  in  trans-disciplinary  areas,  such  as  mechatronics  or 
bio-informatics,  or  inter-disciplinary  fields  such  as  green  energy,  climate  change,  eco-
innovation  or  an  ageing  society.  Such  fields  hold  the  greatest  potential  for  innovation  and 
development  (in  education  and  in  research),  and  they  are  also  distinct  from  the  traditional 
format and curriculum widely offered by universities in Europe.  

Knowledge  communities  would  be  selected  by  the  EIT  Governing  Board  following  a 
competitive  process  based  on  peer  evaluation,  to  identify  the  potential  of  each  proposed 
partnership  to  deliver  in  its  field  within  a  medium-term  time-frame  of  10-15  years.  Upon 
selection,  each  knowledge  community  would  agree  with  the  Governing  Board  the  precise 
objectives  and  milestones  covering  the  three  parts  of  the  knowledge  triangle  in  its  activity; 
regular monitoring and evaluation would ensure that these were being met.  

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
During  its  lifetime  a  knowledge  community  could  develop  in  a  number  of  ways:  flexibility 
must be built into the system. It might need new capacity, perhaps because the areas of work 
have  to  develop  and  new  partners  would  bring  in  new  excellence,  perhaps  because  the 
numbers  of  students  grows  beyond  its  resources.  A  knowledge  community  could  also 
diversify,  because  developments  had  taken  its  work  in  unexpected  directions.  Knowledge 
communities  should  remain  dynamic,  and  the  EIT  should  be  able  to  respond  to  scientific 
developments  as  it  thought  best,  including  by  allowing  partnership  changes,  by  adjusting 
financial arrangements or by allocating additional funds where this was driven by its quest for 
excellence. 

At  all  stages,  the  Governing  Board  would  oversee  the  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the 
knowledge communities against precise benchmarks. 

3.3. 

Legal issues 

Setting up the EIT will require the adoption of a legal instrument, which the Commission will 
propose later in 2006. This legal instrument would establish the EIT and set out its objectives, 
as well as providing for the necessary operational arrangements.  

Further aspects deserve particular attention and will be developed in the coming months: the 
balance between accountability and the independence needed to enable the EIT to manage its 
core  business;  the  status  of  its  staff  needs  to  be  clear  and  common  to  all  the  knowledge 
communities  and  the  central  core;  the  management  and  commercial  use  of  intellectual 
property rights arising from joint research; and finally, the legal integration of the knowledge 
communities  in  the  EIT,  and  the  incentives  and  arrangements  which  surround  it,  will  need 
particular attention. 

3.4. 

Budget 

The main expenditure of the EIT will be on its knowledge communities. Funding needed for 
the  Governing  Board  and  central  core  will  be  relatively  small,  because  it  will  remain  light. 
While initially it would be necessary to provide substantial public core funding, as knowledge 
communities  develop,  the  EIT  is  expected  to  raise  resources  from  other  competitive 
Community and national funding  sources  as  well as from businesses,  foundations,  fees,  etc. 
Attracting  additional  funding  would  be  an  objective,  with  milestones,  in  every  agreement 
between the EIT and a knowledge community partnership.  

Private contributions might come to the EIT in three ways. First, private companies which are 
part of the knowledge communities will from the beginning second resources to the EIT, like 
other  partners.  Secondly,  the  knowledge  communities  showing  excellence  would  win 
contracts  from  private  companies,  eg  for  training  or  research.  Finally,  the  EIT  could  run  a 
private Foundation, to gather contributions from sponsors or other foundations.  

The  legal  instrument  establishing  the  EIT  should  be  adopted  at  the  latest  in  2008. 
Subsequently, the Governing Board should be appointed along with the first staff. Thereafter, 
the first identification of the knowledge communities should take place by 2009, such that the 
first substantial expenditure can occur by 2010. It would be appropriate to commence initially 
with a small number of knowledge communities. 

The timetable above suggests that the funding requirement for the EIT will be concentrated 
towards  the  end  of  the  coming  Financial  Perspectives  period,  and  will  be  limited.  When 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
making its legal proposal, the Commission will present a detailed financial annex setting out 
the volume, nature and origins of the overall funding required, including from EU, national or 
private sources. 

4. 

WHAT WOULD AN EIT PARTNER GET FROM PARTICIPATION? 

It  could  reasonably  be  asked  whether  the  incentives  for  participation  are  sufficient.  The 
objective is that potential partners should second their best teams and departments to the EIT: 
what incentives do they have and what will they get in return? 

Returns  on  this  ‘investment’  will  be  of  different  sorts  for  partners  and  for  individuals 
involved.  For  researchers  and  educators,  experience  shows  that  the  best  researchers  and 
educators  are  attracted  by  independence  in  research,  promising  career  perspectives,  good 
salaries  as  well  as  rewarding  working  conditions.  The  rewards  might  thus  be  financial,  or 
about  freedom  from  bureaucracy,  or  excellent  working  facilities.  They  would  also  include 
association  with  the  best  researchers  and  companies  in  their  field  within  Europe,  and  a 
resulting increased academic visibility.  

For the partner organisations in research and education, there are a range of potential returns.  

–  visibility and attractiveness: the fact of having contributed a team to the EIT will indicate 
excellence, and will be a recruitment factor for other academics, scientists and students, as 
well as a selling point vis-à-vis business.  

–  a privileged relationship with the best work in a particular field in Europe, and access for 
students and researchers to the best minds, the best teaching, training and the best research 
– as well as to the extra rewards available through performance inside the EIT.  

–  knowledge spill-overs, both direct (ie, an impact on related work which has stayed within 
the partner organisation) and indirect (through access to more advanced knowledge in the 
field;  a  commitment  to  dissemination  will  be  part  of  every  knowledge  community’s 
agreement with the EIT).  

–  financial  incentives,  the  EIT  will  be  able  to  invest  in  building  up  capacity  in  partner 
organisations  to  help  rebuild  the  resources  seconded  to  the  EIT  (so  a  partner  university 
would  not  only  have  its  former  department  or  team  still  physically  present  and 
contributing, albeit less directly, to academic work; it would also have additional resources 
available  for  reallocation  or  capacity  building);  and  partners  will  also  share  in  the 
knowledge community’s IPRs.  

–  a dynamic for change, in that the EIT will introduce partners to new ways of working.  

–  local  benefits,  in  that  local  stakeholders  (regional  governments,  businesses)  will  see  the 
EIT involvement as prestigious, and as a chance to foster the local knowledge agenda and 
encourage better cooperation with the university or company concerned. 

And  for  the  private  sector,  there  are  the  gains  of  influencing  the  direction  of  cutting-edge 
research and innovation to commercial effect – having an inside track from the first with the 
guarantee of being able to exploit the results later. In addition, the ongoing relationship with 
the EIT including its knowledge communities would give direct access to a unique centre of 
excellence, with the prestige and recruitment potential that would follow. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
5. 

RELATIONSHIP  WITH  OTHER  EU  EDUCATION,  RESEARCH  AND  INNOVATION 
ACTIVITIES  

The  EU  has  a  variety  of  education,  research  and  innovation  activities.  But  the  EIT  does 
something  distinctively  different.  In  the  first  place,  the  profile  of  European  excellence 
developed by the EIT as a permanent body would be unique. The mix of education, research 
and innovation and the privileged link to the business community would also be unmatched in 
other  Community  initiatives.  While  existing  programmes  concentrate  on  the  individual 
elements  of  the  knowledge  triangle  (the  Erasmus  Programme  is  about  education;  the 
Framework  Programmes  are  about  research;  and  the  Community  Innovation  Programme  is 
about  innovation-related  activities),  the  EIT  will  take  a  hands-on  approach  joining  up  these 
three elements and achieving synergies between them. 

The  EIT  would  be  a  knowledge  operator,  not  a  funding  agency.  It  will  carry  out  activities 
around  the  three  parts  of  the  knowledge  triangle  –  it  will  educate,  do  research,  and  seek  to 
apply the outcomes of that research to commercial or societal ends. That is the real difference 
with the activities carried out under the education, research or innovation programmes, where 
the Commission essentially distributes funds for various pre-defined activities.  

The  EIT  is  thus  complementary  to  these  funding  activities.  It  will  be  able  to  develop 
synergies,  in  particular  with  the  European  Research  Council.  The  ERC  is  a  funding 
mechanism,  which  will  not  itself  do  research.  It  will  provide  funding  to  frontier  research 
projects carried out by individual teams; will be open to all fields of science, using essentially 
a bottom-up approach. The EIT, as an institution working in the fields of education, research 
and  innovation  on  an  inter-  and  trans-disciplinary  basis,  and  with  a  strong  emphasis  on 
economic and societal outcomes, provides the operational part that the ERC does not. It could 
apply  for  funding  to  the  ERC  (and  to  all  other  funding  schemes);  but  it  should  have  no 
preferential access.  

There is also a key difference between the knowledge communities and other networks inside 
Europe  created  with  EU  support  –  such  as  the  networks  of  excellence  under  the  6th 
Framework  Programme.  While  the  networks  of  excellence  involve  a  number  of  universities 
and other research institutions integrating their research capacities, the EIT involves a much 
deeper level of integration of both research and education capacities. In the EIT, institutions 
and companies involved in the knowledge communities will have to second resources to the 
EIT: they will cease to be part of their home organisation, and will become legally part of the 
EIT.  Staff  in  a  knowledge  community  will  have  a  common  management  and  performance-
based evaluation process – under the direction of the EIT.  

6. 

CONCLUSION  

The  modernisation  agenda  for  education,  research  and  innovation  in  European  universities 
and  research  is  well  accepted.  But  it  needs  the  impetus  of  flagship  initiatives  to  accelerate 
progress. The EIT by itself cannot be the whole strategy to raise Europe’s competitiveness in 
the knowledge triangle; but it can play an important role. It can provide a model of high-level 
excellence  responding  to  Europe’s  own  diversity;  it  can  contribute  to  improve  science  and 
research management capacities, thus improving the innovation process within Europe. It can 
provide a destination for European and non-European top graduates and doctoral candidates 
and become a beacon for global talent into Europe. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
The EIT would not acquire academic and research credibility overnight. It would have to earn 
that credibility; everything would depend on the quality of its management, its scientific and 
teaching  staff  and  of  their  achievements  and  outputs,  as  well  as  on  its  ability  to  engage  the 
support from outside the academic world. The EIT’s first governing board and management 
would set the agenda and the tone for the EIT for a generation. 

The consultation process has shown that an EIT structured along the lines set out here could 
provide a strong added value to Europe’s efforts to strengthen knowledge and bring growth in 
Europe.  

This  Communication  offers  a  model  for  developing  an  EIT.  The  Commission  invites  the 
European Council to  consider the  elements  outlined here and to agree on  the importance of 
this  initiative.  The  Commission  will  develop  the  next  steps  on  the  basis  of  a  full  impact 
assessment extended to include a full examination of the legal and financial implications. This 
would be a new step for the European Union. The Commission believes, however, that it is a 
step within Europe’s reach, and one that Europe cannot afford to miss. 

EN 

13 

   EN