Commission Staff Working Document - Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Council Regulation - Setting Up The Clean Sky Joint Undertaking - Analysis of the ffects of a Joint Technology Initiative (JTI) in the area of Aeronautics and Air Transport - Impact Assessment {COM(2007) 315 final} {SEC(2007) 774}
Date: 2007-06-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, EU research policy, air transport, environmental protection, impact study, joint venture, new technology, public-private partnership

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 13.6.2007 
SEC(2007) 773 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

Proposal for a  

Council Regulation  

- Setting Up The Clean Sky Joint Undertaking -  

Analysis of the effects of a Joint Technology Initiative (JTI) in the area of 
AERONAUTICS and AIR TRANSPORT 

IMPACT ASSESSMENT  

{COM(2007) 315 final} 
{SEC(2007) 774} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 3 

1. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

6. 

6.1. 

6.2. 

6.3. 

6.4. 

7. 

7.1. 

7.2. 

7.3. 

Procedural issues and Consultation of Interested Parties............................................. 5 

The problem ................................................................................................................. 6 

Critical role of aeronautics R&D for the enlarged EU................................................. 6 

Challenges for the aviation system in the 21st century................................................ 6 

Market failure justifies Community financial intervention.......................................... 8 

The objectives .............................................................................................................. 9 

Overall objective .......................................................................................................... 9 

Specific objectives ....................................................................................................... 9 

Consistency with other EU policies ........................................................................... 10 

Policy options............................................................................................................. 10 

The criteria for screening policy options ................................................................... 10 

Alternative policy options .......................................................................................... 11 

Implementation choices of Clean Sky JTI ................................................................. 14 

Options short-listed and preliminary ranking ............................................................ 16 

Analysis of Impacts.................................................................................................... 16 

Analysis of Impacts of a FP – only EU action ........................................................... 16 

Analysis of Impacts of Clean Sky.............................................................................. 18 

Comparing the options ............................................................................................... 24 

Ranking the options in terms of the criteria ............................................................... 24 

Expected incremental impact of Clean Sky JTI......................................................... 27 

Additionality of Clean Sky ........................................................................................ 29 

Risks associated with Clean Sky................................................................................ 30 

Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 32 

Preparation of the Governance structure.................................................................... 32 

Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 32 

Measurement of progress ........................................................................................... 33 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The  Seventh  Framework  Programme  (FP7;  2007-2013)  introduces  the  concept  of  Joint  Technology 
Initiatives (JTI) as a response to the real needs of industry and other stakeholders. JTIs are conceived 
as public-private partnerships (PPP) and have been identified by the European Commission to support 
a limited number of European Technology Platforms in reaching their objectives. Clean Sky is the JTI 
proposed  in  the  Aeronautics  sector  of  the  Transport  Theme,  addressing  environmentally  friendly 
technologies for Air Transport. 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

5) 

Clean  Sky  is  the  preferred  option  to  pursue  the  stated  objective  of  accelerating  the 
development of clean Air Transport technologies in the EU for earliest possible application. 
Its  overall  budget  appears  to  be  proportionate  to  the  objectives  and  the  ITDs  have  clear 
environmental targets and well defined deliverables and road maps. The base case scenario 
of  FP  only  EU  action  will  stimulate  research,  but  on  a  lower  level  and  delayed  timescale 
compared with Clean Sky. 

Clean  Sky  mitigates  the  different  types  of  market  failure  which  discourage  private 
investment  in  aeronautics  research  generally  and  clean  Air  Transport  technologies  in 
particular. It provides integration and demonstration at the full- system level, thus decreasing 
the risk for private investment in developing new environment-friendly aeronautics products. 
It  applies  an  innovative  integrated  multidisciplinary  approach,  covering  the  full  scope  of 
aeronautics  technologies,  thus  enabling  economies  of  scale  and  scope  in  EU  aeronautics 
R&D  to  be  fully  exploited.  It  stimulates  private  EU  R&D  investment  in  environment-
friendly technologies thus addressing the existing R&D and environmental externalities.  

Clean Sky represents a major contribution to the implementation of the goals of the ACARE 
(Advisory  Council  for  Aeronautics  Research  in  Europe)  Strategic  Research  Agenda  on 
environment. At the aircraft level, it is expected by 2020 to reduce CO2 aircraft emission by 
around 20%-40%, NOx by around 60% and noise by 10db to 20db. At the fleet level, over 
the  2015-2050  period,  Clean  Sky  is  expected  to  lead  to  an  aggregate  reduction  of  2  to  3 
billion tonnes of CO2 over 35 years, and thus will make a significant step towards achieving 
the ACARE targets.  

Clean Sky has an important additionality effect at the Community level, as it will stimulate 
private  and  national  R&D  programmes  on  clean  Air  Transport  technologies.  Clean  Sky  is 
expected  to  stimulate  additional  private  investment  of  €800  million  in  R&D  for  reducing 
aviation environmental impact, matching the public money provided. In addition, the value 
of  industry  funded  R&D  performed  in  the  EU  over  the  years  2010-2030  is  expected  to 
increase  considerably,  in  order  to  develop  new  products  incorporating  Clean  Sky 
technologies.  It  also  has  an  important  impact  on  economic  output  in  the  EU.  The  present 
value, at 2006 prices, of the cumulative direct effect over the period 2010-2035 of Clean Sky 
on economic output in the EU has been estimated to reach approximately ~€100-160 billion 
reflecting  increased  operating  profits,  labour  expenditures,  capital  investment  and  other 
direct  effects,  to  be  compared  to  €800  million  of  public  money  to  be  invested  into  the 
programme.  In  addition  it  is  estimated  there  will  be  spillover  benefits  through  knowledge 
transfer to other sectors and regions amounting to €450 billion. 

Clean Sky governance structure is well balanced, transparent, and efficient. It ensures cross-
fertilisation  between  the  different  Integrated  Technology  Demonstrators,  and  provides 
mechanisms  for  openness  and  transparency  that  will  ensure  that  public  funds  are  properly 
and efficiently used, thus considerably reducing the risks associated to investing a large sum 
of  public  money  in  a  single  programme  with  a  great  technological  and  managerial 
complexity. Member States will be able to continuously monitor how the important financial 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
6) 

7) 

and administrative Clean Sky targets are maintained, thanks to two external advisory bodies: 
the  National  States  Representatives  Group  and  the  Transport  Programme  Committee.  The 
Commission will have veto rights on all matters impacting on public interest. 

Clean  Sky  represents  a  major  opportunity  for  SMEs.  The  target  for  SMEs  involvement  is 
12%  of  EU  funds.  In  addition  Clean  Sky  will  have  a  major  role  in  integrating  the  EU 
industry,  offering  to  SMEs  the  possibility  to  work  with  major  players.  The  internal  and 
external  control  mechanisms  ensuring  transparency  and  openness,  will  favour  the 
participation of Universities and Research Centres.  

Clean Sky is a project of common European interest as it contributes in a substantial way to 
achieving  Europe’s  strategic  environmental  and  social  priorities,  in  combination  with 
sustainable economic growth. It will improve the quality of life of European citizens by its 
positive impact on public health, mobility, creation of new jobs and contribution to economic 
prosperity.  

Implementation of Clean Sky should take place as soon as possible, for the following reasons: 

a) 

b) 

c) 

The environmental challenge requires immediate action to promote the development of clean 
transport  technologies  for  earliest  possible  deployment1.  We  have  seen  that  cleaner  Air 
Transport  technologies  will  contribute  to  improve  welfare  and  living  condition  in  a 
sustainable way for present and future generations in the EU.  

Moving  fast  in  launching  the  JTI  is  of  crucial  importance  since,  by  around  2015, 
approximately  5700  aircrafts  of  the  world  present  fleet  will  have  reached  the  end  of  their 
targeted  lifetime.  If  Clean  Sky  breakthrough  technologies  will  be  ready  for  introduction, 
such  fleet  replacement  will  contribute  substantially  to  pollution  reduction,  and  will  also 
contribute  to  set  new  international  standards.  The  immediate  implementation  of  the  Clean 
Sky Proposal is crucial as products in the aerospace sector remain in service for a very long 
time  (~25  years).  If  a  technology  is  not  sufficiently  mature  to  be  incorporated  in  new 
products,  it  may  miss  the  next  market  window  and  fail  to  influence  a  whole  generation  of 
aircraft development.  

Launching  Clean  Sky  soon  is  important  to  address  the  challenges  from  international 
competition.  The  US  Government  has  just  approved  a  major  Aeronautics  Research  and 
Development  plan,  with  the  overarching  goal  to  advance  US  technological  leadership  in 
aeronautics. China, India and Russia are becoming very active in the industry. Not launching 
Clean  Sky  soon  will  put  the  European  industry  in  a  position  of  competitive  disadvantage, 
with negative repercussions not only for the industry itself but also for the EU as a whole.  

1 

See COM(2007) 2, p. 8 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1. 

PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES 

This  document  presents  the  impact  analysis  of  the  "Clean  Sky"  Joint  Technology  Initiative  (further 
referred to as Clean Sky), which was drawn up in accordance with the Commission's guidelines for ex-
ante impact assessments2. 

The Seventh Framework Programme (FP7; 2007-2013)3 introduces the concept of Joint Technology 
Initiatives (JTI) as a response to the real needs of industry and other stakeholders. JTIs are conceived 
as public-private partnerships (PPP) and have been identified by the European Commission4 to support 
a  limited  number  of  European  Technology  Platforms  in  reaching  their  objectives5.  With  the 
introduction of JTIs, the Community will for the first time offer a legal and organisational framework 
that allows the effective pooling of resources across all R&D undertakers in a specific area, both from 
the public and the private sector. JTIs should pursue activities that are of common European interest6 
and their establishment should contribute to the achievement of the Lisbon competitiveness objective 
and the Barcelona targets for research spending7. 

Clean Sky has been identified by the Commission as one of the potential areas for the establishment of 
a JTI during the implementation of FP78.  

The present impact assessment of Clean Sky is based on two documents, and further input has been 
provided through two hearings organised by the Deputy-DG RTD that took place to review the state of 
preparedness of the Impact Assessment documentation.  

The  first  document,  "Report  on  the  Assessment  Exercise  on  the  "Clean  Sky"  Final  Proposal"  was 
drawn  up  by  an  independent  group  of  experts,  formed  of  specialists  recommended  by  the  Member 
States,  established  under  a  contract  of  the  European  Commission.  The  panel  has  been  involved  in  a 
first  evaluation  that  took  place  in  January/February  2006,  on  which  occasion  they  reviewed  an 
intermediate  version  of  the  JTI  proposal.  Their  recommendations  have  been  taken  into  account, 
resulting  in  the  March  '07  version  of the  Clean  Sky  Proposal  that  has  been  reviewed  for  the  second 
report dated February 2007. It is this second report that has served as input, focussing on an analysis of 
the market situation for European Aeronautics, the objectives targeted within the Clean Sky JTI, the 
policy  options  and  analysis  of  the  impact  on  socio-economic  level.  For  their  analysis,  the  panel  has 
used  the  JTI  Proposal  document,  along  with  supporting  material  provided  by  industry  and 
Commission.  The  most  important  economical  information  is  based  on  studies  performed  by  Oxford 
Economic  Forecasting  and  PriceWaterhouseCoopers,  supplemented  by  dialogues  with  industry 
representatives at a two-days Workshop, end of January 2007. 

The  second  document,  entitled  "Clean  Sky,  a  Joint  Technology  Initiative  for  Aeronautics  and  Air 
Transport – Executive Summary", was drawn up by the industrial founding members of Clean Sky in 

2 
3 
4 

5 

6 
7 

8 

Impact Assessment Guidelines - SEC(2005) 791, European Commission, 2005. 
Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on FP7 No 1982/2006/EC of 18 Dec. 2006. 
COM(2004) 353 “Science and technology, the key to Europe’s future – Guidelines for future European 
Union policy to support research”. 
SEC(2005)  800,  European  Commission,  2005Report  on  European  Technology  Platforms  and  Joint 
Technology  Initiatives:  Fostering  Public-Private  R&D  Partnerships  to  Boost  Europe’s  Industrial 
competitiveness. 
SEC(88)1882 
COM(2005) 488 "More Research and Innovation - Investing for Growth and Employment :A Common 
Approach" Impact Assessment. 
Council  Decision  on  the  Specific  Programme  "Cooperation"  implementing  the  Seventh  Framework 
Programme  (2007-2013)  of  the  European  Community  for  research,  technological  development  and 
demonstration activities; 2006/971/EC, 19 Dec. 2006. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
response to a letter sent out by Dir H (A. Siegler) asking them to demonstrate the readiness of the so-
called "Keys to Success" (Market failure, Additionality, Governance and Role of Member States). The 
document  was  jointly  prepared  by  Airbus,  Rolls-Royce,  Alenia  Aeronautica,  Eurocopter,  Thales, 
Liebherr,  Dassault  Aviation,  AgustaWestland  and  Safran.  As  can  be  deduced  from  its  title,  this 
document also served the as updated executive summary for the final Clean Sky Proposal.  

The  Clean  Sky  proposal,  and  the  governance  aspects  in  particular,  have  taken  on  board  inputs  from 
Member  States,  collected  in  the  course  of  a  number  of  workshops  (2005-2006)  organised  by  the 
Commission.  The  currently  proposed  governance  structure  has  broad  support,  both  from  industrial 
stakeholders and from Member States. 

The Strategic Research Agenda and the Clean Sky Joint Technology Initiative have also been publicly 
presented  and  discussed  in  major  events  such  as  the  ASD  Convention  2006  (Vienna)  and  the  FP7 
information days. 

In  the  period  June-November  2006,  the  industrial  founding  members  have  organised  various 
workshops and information sessions throughout Europe to generate interest for participation in Clean 
Sky; this has resulted in more than 120 expressions of interest from industry, SMEs, universities, and 
research establishments. 

In  the  final  stage  before  going  into  Inter-Service  Consultation,  the  Clean  Sky  proposal  and  the 
documents related to the impact assessment have undergone evaluation by a panel called together by 
the Deputy-DG (Z. Stančič), composed of representation from various DGs and SecGen, as well as a 
number of independent external experts. The additional clarifications provided to this panel have been 
included in the present version of the documents presented for Inter-Service Consultation. 

2. 

THE PROBLEM  

2.1. 

Critical role of aeronautics R&D for the enlarged EU 

The vital role of the Air Transport Sector in the further integration and growth of the enlarged EU and 
in  the  life  of  EU  citizens  has  been  clearly  illustrated  by  Vision  2020  and  in  the  Strategic  Research 
Agenda (SRA) of the Aeronautics Technology Platform (ACARE).  

Aeronautics is as an industry with a very strong economic and social impact. The Aeronautics sector is 
characterised  by  a  high  R&D  intensity  (around  14%),  a  large  positive  trade  balance,  and  is  an 
important employer of highly skilled personnel. Furthermore it has a critical role in fostering European 
integration.  

2.2. 

Challenges for the aviation system in the 21st century 

The aeronautics sector is confronted with important challenges in the 21st century. 

On the one hand this industry is facing the necessity to reduce its contribution to climate change 
and emissions and noise around airports. Air Transport is currently a relatively small source of the 
greenhouse  gas  (GHG)  emissions  contributing  to  global  warming,  but  its  share  is  rapidly  growing. 
According  to  data  from  the  European  Commission9,  in  2003  the  CO2  emissions  from  international 
flights  from  European  airports  were  about  3%  of  total  EU  CO2  emissions,  but  the  overall  impact  of 
these  flights  was  greater  than  this  figure  indicates.  Apart  from  emitting  CO2,  aircraft  contribute  to 
climate change through emission of nitrogen oxides (NOx) which are particularly effective in forming 

9 

SEC(2005) 1184, annex Impact Assessment p.4. See also SEC(2006) 1684, p. 6; COM(2005) 459 ; the 
Stern Review (2006) Annex 7.c  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ozone (a greenhouse gas) when emitted at cruise altitude. Aircraft emissions also trigger the formation 
of  condensation  trails  suspected  of  enhancing  the  formation  of  cirrus  clouds,  which  also  add  to  the 
overall global warming effect.  

ACARE identified the reduction of aviation impact on environment as one of its High Level Target 
Concepts, concluding that step technological changes are needed to reach the goals by 2020 of cutting 
CO2 emissions by 50% per seat*kilometre, reduce NOx by 80%, reduce perceived external noise by 
half,  and  making  substantial  progress  in  reducing  the  environmental  impact  of  the  manufacture, 
maintenance and disposal of aircraft and related products10 . 

Apart  from  emission  reduction,  Clean  Sky  has  also  committed  itself  to  reducing  the  perceived 
aircraft  noise  by  half.  The  expected  growth  of  air  traffic,  will  impact  on  the  environment  also  in 
terms of noise levels, as a problem affecting the community as a whole. One of the many examples of 
this problem is the issue of aircraft flying over Brussels in approach, landing, and take-off procedures. 
For the areas surrounding airports, the critical parameter to consider is the so-called "noise footprint" 
of  the  aircraft,  meaning  the  area  which  is  exposed  to  noise  levels  in  excess  of  85dB.  For  an  Airbus 
A300-600, this is 4.17 km², whereas for the upcoming A350 it is anticipated to be in the 1-2 km² area. 
It is clear that a further reduction of the overall noise level generated by the aircraft will further reduce 
their noise footprint, with a beneficial effect on the airport neighbourhood. 

The  situation  is  different  for  helicopters,  as  these  have  much  more  flexibility  in  landing  area  or  the 
choice of flight trajectory: the usage of helicopters in the Community has until now been concentrated 
in  activities  such  as  medical  evacuation,  rescue,  civil  protection,  aerial  work,  and  law  enforcement. 
These  activities  are  required  to  satisfy  today’s  primary  needs  of  the  population  since  the  helicopter 
appears definitely the most efficient or even the unique vehicle able to fulfil these essential functions. 
As  such,  the  significant  noise  impact  around  hospital  rooftop  platforms,  fire  fighting  and  police 
centres,  is  generally,  although  reluctantly  accepted. However,  these  operations  are  expected  to  grow 
sharply in the near future to face the European citizen’s demand for a safer and more secure society.  

In  addition,  the  citizen’s  increasing  need  for  mobility  in  all  regions  of  the  Community  including 
peripheral regions is expected to trigger a significant growth (2 to 3--fold increase in the 2015-2030 
period) of rotorcraft traffic for passenger transport.  

This expected growth of rotorcraft traffic will generate a noise impact, not only near airports but also 
in  many  sensitive  inhabited  areas,  to  such  an  extent  it  would  become  unacceptable  to  the  society 
unless  a  major  R  &  T  investment  is  promptly  made  to  further  mature  and  implement  the  noise 
reduction techniques.  

On the other hand the EU aeronautics industry is confronted with strong international competition. 
The US industry and government heavily invest in aeronautics R&D. The role of public support is of 
primary importance. Private investment in civil Aeronautics Research is broadly equivalent in the EU 
and USA but public investment in Europe is only a quarter of that in the USA11. On December 20th 
2006,  the  US  Government  issued  an  Executive  Order  establishing  the  US  first  Aeronautics 
Research  and  Development  Policy.  The  overarching  goal  of  this  policy  is  to  advance  US 
technological leadership in aeronautics. A continued strong US Government role in aeronautics R&D 
is recommended. This will enable the USA to pursue their objectives in aeronautics with considerably 
greater speed than the EU, due to the different institutional setting. At the same time other competitors 

10 
11 

SRA-2, p. 17. 
see ACARE SRA-2, p. 86. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
have emerged in recent years such as Brazil. Russia, China, and India are also becoming very active in 
the industry12.  

Technological capability and innovative potential may play a critical role in reducing aviation impact 
on the environment and in facing increased international competition. As suggested by ACARE SRA-
2,  what  this  sector  requires  is  not  incremental  improvements  but  major  innovations,  i.e.  step 
changes. However, due to market failure and in absence of public intervention, private companies are 
not  able  to  mobilise  the  resources  necessary  to  develop  and  introduce  the  major  technological 
advances needed for the greening of Air Transport.  

2.3. 

Market failure justifies Community financial intervention 

Public  financial  intervention  is  justified  by  the  necessity  to  address  the  different  sources  of  market 
failure discouraging aeronautics research in the reduction of fuel consumption, emission, and noise of 
future aircraft.  

In the case of Aeronautics research, market failure13 preventing the optimum development of the 
technological area assumes a variety of forms14:  

1) 

2) 

There is a higher level of risk, and a longer period before project results show a positive 
return  on  investment,  than  acceptable  to  industry  or  to  the  financial  community. 
Aeronautics  programmes  are  high  risk  both  technically  and  commercially,  with  very  long 
programme  timescales  (returns  are  often  delivered  decades  after  the  original  investment), 
and low profitability which discourage private investment. This is the case particularly when 
R&D  for  greening  aircraft  is  considered.  Thus,  it  is  not  possible  to  rely  simply  on  market 
mechanisms to achieve major innovations such as those needed for the greening of aircraft. 

The step changes required to implement the ACARE SRA-2 for greening of Air Transport 
can  only  be  met  effectively  if  a  number  of  investments  are  put  in  place  as  part  of  a  co-
ordinated approach. Given the close interdependence between individual systems and parts 
used in aeronautics, the delivery of the necessary innovation can only be achieved through an 
innovative  integrated  multidisciplinary  approach.  Major  areas  of  work  have  to  cover  the 
broad range of R&D work: aircraft (fixed wing and rotorcraft),  engines, systems, and eco-
design concepts able to deliver more environment-friendly aircraft production and operation. 

3) 

There  are  significant  externalities,  connected  both  to  aeronautics  R&D  investment  and  to 
aviation impact on climate change. 

A positive externality is generated by R&D investment in Aeronautics. It is well known in economics 
that the innovative firm does not fully appropriate the benefits of its R&D investment since there is 
involuntary  knowledge  dissemination  through  various  channels,  as  the  social  return  on  R&D 
investment is higher than the private rate of return. The gap between the social and the private rate 
of return on R&D investment is particularly wide in the case of aeronautics due to the nature of 
the  industry15.  There  are  indications  that  supply  chain  relationships  in  the  development  and 
manufacture of new products may be a key channel through which these large economic benefits are 
realised.  And  in  the  case  of  Aeronautics  the  supply  chain  is  particularly  articulated,  with  flows  of 
knowledge both horizontal and vertical. The large social return on R&D in this sector is also due to the 

12 

13 
14 
15 

On the rapid rise of R&D in China as compared to EU-25 see Eurostat (2006), Science, Technology and 
Innovation in Europe, p. 35.  
For market failure definition, see SEC(2005) 800, p. 11. 
Note that here the ranking does not indicate priority. 
Oxford  Economic  Forecasting,  PriceWaterhouseCoopers,  Rolls-Royce  (October  2004)  “The  wider 
economic benefits of R&D – research paper on spillovers”. mimeo 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
fact  that  aeronautics  technologies  also  flow  into  other  industrial  sectors,  generating  inter-industry 
R&D  technological  spillovers  (i.e.  design  software:  automotive;  aerodynamics:  rail  transport; 
lightweight materials: civil engineering; diagnostics: healthcare).  

A negative externality is also associated to civil aviation. As with the rest of the transport sector, the 
full  environmental  costs  to  society  are  not  paid  by  operators  or  manufacturers,  in  spite  of  the  EU 
efforts  in  ICAO  for  introducing  new  economic  instruments  for  reducing  international  aviation 
impact16.  This negative  externality  represents  a  market  failure  that  results  in  sub-optimal  investment 
in,  and  deployment  of,  new  environmentally  beneficial  technologies.  Technological  innovation  is  a 
key measure to reduce the extent of this negative externality all over the world. 

3. 

THE OBJECTIVES 

3.1. 

Overall objective 

The  overall  objective  is  accelerating  in  the  EU  the  development  of  clean  Air  Transport 
technologies for earliest possible deployment17 which will contribute to achieving Europe’s strategic 
environmental18  and  social  priorities,  in  combination  with  sustainable  economic  growth.  By 
accelerating  the  introduction  of  green  technologies,  the  Air  Transport  industry  will  be  stimulated  to 
develop in a sustainable fashion, reducing its environmental impacts, while at the same time satisfying 
the need of EU citizens for improved quality of life and mobility. 

Furthermore, European aeronautical industry will be encouraged to take the lead in the development of 
clean  Air  Transport  technology  at  a  global  level,  and  at  the  same  time  its  competitiveness  will  be 
strengthened. 

3.2. 

Specific objectives 

To achieve this policy target the impact assessment identified a number of specific objectives.  

3.2.1 

Implementing  a  large  scale  programme  promoting  pre-competitive  EU  aeronautics  R&D 
to enable the major technological advances required to reduce in a significant way by 2020 
CO2  aviation  emissions,  noise,  and  NOx  and  to  reduce  the  environmental  impact  of 
manufacture,  maintenance,  and  disposal  of  aircraft.  The  programme  should  thus  allow 
making  significant  progress  towards  the  goals  set  by  ACARE  in  its  Strategic  Research 
Agenda with regard to the greening of Air Transport19.  

3.2.2 

Such policy should maximise the efficiency of EU aeronautics research efforts, by making 
possible to exploit both economies of scale and scope in R&D. A co-ordinated approach is 
particularly  important  in  this  sector  where  the  necessary  innovations  can  only  be  achieved 
through an innovative multidisciplinary approach.  

16 
17 
18 

19 

ICAO has endorsed the concept of international open emissions trading. 
See COM(2007)2, p. 2. 
The European Parliament and European Council in spring 2005 re-affirmed the EU objective of limiting 
global temperature increase to a maximum of 2o C (the 2o objective).  
We are referring to the High Level Target Concept on the Greening of Air Transport in the ACARE 2nd 
edition of the Strategic Research Agenda (March 2005). Improving Air Traffic Management will also 
give an important contribution to achieving these goals. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.2.4 

The policy should also increase industry ability of rapid exploitation of the potential step 
changes  in  clean  Air  Transport  technologies.  This  is  of  vital  importance  to  implement 
ACARE  SRA  on  environment.  In  many  sectors  Europe  does  not  currently  have  sufficient 
capacity  to  transform  knowledge  into  commercial  products  and  services20,  however  the 
ability  to  accelerate  market  introduction  of  new  technology  is  particularly  critical  when 
confronted with the environmental challenge.  

3.3. 

Consistency with other EU policies 

A  policy  designed  to  stimulate  research  and  development  in  the  aeronautics  sector,  leading  to 
environmentally efficient aircraft, is one pillar of the global strategy presented in the communication 
COM(2005)459 of September 2005 to reduce the climate impact of aviation, which was endorsed by 
the  Council  (2  December  2005)  and  the  Parliament  (4  July  2006).  Stimulating  aeronautics  R&D  is 
complementary to measures such as the Commission proposal to include aviation in the EU Emission 
Trading Scheme (ETS)21.  

Furthermore  stimulating  aeronautics  R&D  will  contribute  to  the  implementation  of  the  European 
Union Strategic Objectives of “delivering stronger, lasting growth and  more and better jobs”. These 
have been identified as the key strategic priorities of the new start for the Lisbon Strategy launched 
in 2005 in order to address the challenges facing Europe’s society22. It will also be consistent with the 
Community transport policy as it encourages sustainable development of Air Transport23. 

Greener aviation technologies will contribute towards mobility within an enlarged EU, which will be 
particularly important for accession states where traffic is growing rapidly from a low base. 

To  sum  up,  a  policy  aimed  to  stimulate  step  changes  in  clean  Air  Transport  for  earlier  possible 
deployment will contribute to improve welfare and living condition in a sustainable way for present 
and  future  generations  in  the  EU.  The  effect  of  Clean  Sky  can  be  reinforced  through  appropriate, 
stimulating government incentives.  

4. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

4.1. 

The criteria for screening policy options 

The criteria for assessing different policy options were first identified. The Panel concluded that the 
potential  of  an  action  to  enable  the  major  technological  advances  required  reducing  by  2020  in  a 
substantial way CO2 aviation emission, noise and NOx is crucially dependent on the joint presence of 
seven factors. These factors were adopted as criteria and are listed below.  

Scale  of  investment.  Only  a  large  scale  programme  with  a  well  structured  and  focused  research 
agenda will be able to stimulate the necessary technological breakthroughs. 

Continuity  of  the  research  programme.  Long-term  continuity  is  required  to  achieve  the  stated 
objectives. 

20 
21 

22 
23 

COM(2005)800 p. 4. 
See the Impact Assessment conducted for ETS, 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/pdf/aviation/sec_2006_1684_en.pdf 
and section 5 of COM(2005) 35.  
See COM(2005)459 , p. 22 
See European Commission (2001), White Paper, European Transport Policy for 2010: time to decide. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
 
Leverage  of  private  and  public  resources  consistent  with  the  objectives  of  the  research  programme 
and with the EU international trade obligations. High leverage of private and public resources is a key 
ingredient for the success of the programme.  

Critical mass of participants and multidisciplinary approach. The programme should allow for the 
participation of primes and supply chains members, SMEs, Universities and Research Centres.  

integration  between  all  stakeholders, 

Co-ordination  and 
the  close 
interdependence  between  the  individual  systems  and  parts  used  in  aeronautics.  Tight  co-ordination 
and  integration  is  essential  for  allowing  the  exploitation  of  economies  of  scale  and  scope  in 
aeronautics R&D. That will partly depend on point f) below.  

into  account 

taking 

Efficiency  of  the  governance  structure.  The  governance  structure  should  ensure,  for  instance, 
control  and  flexibility, 
the  programme, 
accountability. A careful designed governance structure is a key factor to ensure that public funds are 
efficiently used. 

transparency  and  monitoring  of  activities  during 

Technology  readiness  demonstration.  The  policy  should  allow  for  validating  complex  systems  at 
large scale and high technology readiness level. High financial and technological risks are associated 
with  the  integration  of  innovative  technologies  in  new  aircraft  and  rotorcraft.  In  order  to  stimulate 
industry on long term and large multidisciplinary investment, with high risk and low profitability, it is 
important  that  the  research  programme  should  include  the  demonstrators  needed  to  validate 
technologies  at  Technology  Readiness  Level  24  6  (TRL  6),  which  is  the  level  preceding  the  system 
prototype demonstration in an operational environment.  

4.2. 

Alternative policy options 

The following policy options were examined: 

•  No EU action 

•  EUREKA type of intervention25 

•  FP-only EU action (use of traditional instruments of Collaborative Research) 

•  Clean Sky JTI 

The  Panel  first  assessed  the  four  options  on  the  basis  of  qualitative  analysis,  using  the  criteria 
identified. The key arguments are briefly summarised below. 

No EU action 

A No EU action approach may take the form of not intervening at any level (national or EU). Such 
non  regulatory  option  was  rejected  at  an  early  stage  because  -as  shown  in  section  2-  due  to  several 
types of market failure, it is not possible to rely simply on market mechanisms to achieve the major 
innovations needed for the greening of aircraft.  

A  No  EU  action  approach  may  take  the  form  of  stimulating  research  only  at  the  national  level. 
However the scale and scope of the research agenda for greening aircraft goes beyond the capacity of 
individual  Member  States,  both  in  terms  of  the  financial  commitment  and  of  the  research  capacity 
involved. National R&D policy may have an important role in complementing an EU programme on 

24 
25 

See Technology Readiness Levels elaborated by NASA which are presented in chapter 6 of the report. 
See http://www.eureka.net for more information on this type of intervention. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
promoting  the  development  of  clean  Air  Transport  technologies,  but  cannot  substitute  action  at  the 
Community level to meet the criteria mentioned above in section 3.1. The option fails criteria a, b, c, d 
and thus was rejected without further investigation. 

EUREKA type approach 

The EUREKA type approach was considered as not suitable for several reasons. For instance, it will 
not allow the size of budget required to overcome the high technological and commercial risks which 
discourage private investment in developing green aircraft technology. In addition, EUREKA funding 
has  a  shorter  duration  than  the  one  required  achieving  the  overall  objective  in  section  2.1. 
Furthermore, EUREKA is an intergovernmental programme and thus it does not represent an adequate 
instrument  to  pursue  the  objective  of  accelerating  the  development  and  introduction  of  green  air 
transport technologies, which is of general Community interest. The approach thus failed on the basis 
of criteria a, b, c, d and thus was rejected at an early stage.  

FP-only EU action 

Traditional Instruments of Collaborative Research have been designed to stimulate: upstream research 
and  focussed  downstream  research.  The  Experts  agreed  that  they  represent  the  most  effective 
instruments to stimulate basic research and validation at the sub-system level or at a system level.  

Traditional Instruments of Collaborative Research were however ranked as sub-optimal to pursue the 
objective  to  accelerating  the  development  of  clean  Air  Transport  technologies  in  the  EU  for 
earliest  possible  application,  as  it  requires  full-system  technologies  demonstration  (i.e.  integration 
and demonstration of a combination of systems). It is clear that an individual action of Collaborative 
Research will not have the scale sufficient to pursue such objective. However, according to the Panel 
Assessment,  even  if  a  large  scale  budget  (a  budget  comparable  to  public  funds  to  be  potentially 
invested in Clean Sky JTI) were distributed between different projects of Collaborative Research with 
the same time horizon, the proposed target to develop technologies to reduce in a significant way by 
2020 CO2 aviation emissions, noise and NOx will not be fulfilled. 

An FP-only EU action was assessed as not adequate to pursue the stated objective for several reasons: 
lack  of  critical  mass  due  to  the  division  of  the  overall  R&D  budget  in  different  separate  projects 
(criteria  d));  lack  of  the  necessary  integration  and  coordination  between  participants  (criteria  e); 
inability to allow validation at the required level of readiness (TRL 6) (criteria g) and lack of a legal 
and governance structure able to provide the necessary leadership for achieving the research objectives 
(criteria f). 

Clean Sky Joint Technology Initiative (JTI)  

The JTI is a new funding scheme under the Seventh Framework Programme for realising particularly 
ambitious  research  and  technology  agendas,  which  require  high  public  and  private  investment  at 
European level26.  

Clean  Sky  is  a  JTI  aiming  to  accelerate  the  development  and  introduction  of  major  technological 
changes to substantially improve the impact on the environment of next generation aircraft, rotorcraft, 
and  their  associated  equipment.  It  is  articulated  around  6  Integrated  Technology  Demonstrators 
(ITDs). There are three vehicle ITDs (SMART fixed-wing Aircraft; Green Regional Aircraft; Green 
Rotorcraft) and two transverse ITDs (Sustainable and Green Engine; Systems for Green Operations) 
that  will  deliver  results  to  the  vehicle  ITDs.  Furthermore  an  Eco-Design  ITD  will  support  the  other 
ITDs  in  terms  of  the  greening  of  design,  manufacturing,  production,  maintenance,  and  disposal.  In 

26 

see COM (2006) 502 final p. 9 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
addition  a  Clean  Sky  Technology  Evaluator  will  oversee  the  whole  programme.  The  corporate 
structure  of  “Clean  Sky”  is  represented  by  a  Joint  Undertaking  (JU),  which  will  be  a  legal  entity 
created as a Community organisation under article 171 of the EC treaty.  

Clean Sky was assessed by the Panel as a project of common European interest as it is expected27 to 
reduce by 2020 CO2 emission per seat of new aircraft by around 20%-40%, NOx by around 60% and 
noise  by  10db  to  20db  (the  reduction  depends  on  the  aircraft  type  as  shown  in  the  Proposal,  part  I, 
section 2.6). Clear goals are set for each ITD. Clean Sky has been considered by the Panel as an option 
adequate  to  make  a  major  step  towards  the  implementation  of  the  Strategic  Research  Agenda  of 
ACARE on environment. The reasons are briefly explained here (see also section 6). It is a large scale 
programme  on  greening  Air  Transport,  with  an  overall  budget  of  €1.600  million  to  implement  a 
focused  research  agenda  over  a  seven  years  period.  The  programme  will  stimulate  €800  million 
additional R&D investment from industry, which represents 50% of the Clean Sky budget (fulfilling 
criteria a, b, c).  

The environmental goals of Clean Sky are so ambitious that they require technological breakthroughs 
to  be  validated  faster  than  the  usual  R&D  pace.  Thus,  Clean  Sky,  implementing  an  innovative 
multidisciplinary  approach,  will  cover  the  full  scope  of  aeronautics  technology  and  ensure  the 
integration of new component, system and vehicle technologies, their large scale validation, and full-
system demonstration. It will thus provide a basis on which innovative green products can be launched 
at  an  acceptable  risk  (criteria  g).  The  Technology  Evaluator  will  integrate  the  technical  content 
across Clean Sky and allow for transparency and monitoring of the R&D activities (fulfilling criteria 
d, e; see also section 7).  

Several  flying  and  full  scale  ground  demonstrators  will  be  manufactured  and  operated  to  fully 
demonstrate the viability of new system technologies and design concepts. They are described in detail 
in part II of the Proposal, section 5. 

It should be noted that the effect of Clean Sky will be leveraged through incorporation of logistics of 
aircraft and fleet management: the Technology Evaluator will form an all-encompassing model of the 
Air  Transport  System  at  the  fleet  level,  not  only  taking  into  account  he  performance  of  the  various 
types of aircraft but also of the mode in which they are operated: an aggressive flight envelope with 
steep climb and descent under high power, as used by low-cost airlines to maximise the turn-around 
time, has a significant impact on the noise and emissions produced by the aircraft. By including these 
variations into the ATS model, an additional parameter will be evaluated adding to the accuracy of the 
predictions.  Furthermore,  links  with  the  SESAR  JU  and  DG  TREN  will  ensure  that  up-to-date 
information is used. 

In this context, the "No EU action" described above should be read as "action on national level", as we 
have established above that action should be taken.  

Both the "No EU action" and the "EUREKA-type" approaches have in common that action is required 
from  Member  States,  either  individually  or  jointly.  Apart  from  the  obvious  consideration  that 
aeronautics is a transnational issue and that the necessary critical mass needs to be reached in order to 
obtain  the  desired  scale  and  speed  of  innovation,  there  is  the  additional  issue  of  dependability  on 
national support. It is often the case that a change in government (in the order of once per decade) also 
brings a change of priorities along with it, which can seriously impact any initiatives that are taken on 
a national level.  

In order to achieve a large-scale, continuous, and consistent approach to the problem at hand, it is thus 
preferable to opt for EU-coordinated action. 

27 

See Proposal Executive Summary, “Quantifying the value of the Clean Sky programme”.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The final choice is then between FP-only or JTI, and the JTI is the only instrument that at the same 
time guarantees a tight coordination (ensuring that all efforts are optimally applied to reach the final 
goals)  and  a  sufficient  level  of  integration  and  technology  readiness  to  enable  quick  pick-up  and 
exploitation of the results. 

4.3. 

Implementation choices of Clean Sky JTI 

In addition to the general JTI approach described in the previous section, this point will address the 
reasoning  behind  the  choices  that  are  proposed  in  the  implementation  of  Clean  Sky:  why  are  the  6 
Integrated Technology Demonstrators used as a basis, and why is a Community investment of €800 
million justified? 

The 6 Integrated Technology Demonstrators represent, on one hand, the three most important types 
of  aircraft  in  production  (large  passenger  aircraft,  regional  aircraft  and  rotorcraft),  and  on  the  other 
hand the two main supporting technologies common to these types (engines and systems). Finally, an 
overall activity in the form of the Technology Evaluator makes sure that in the entire life cycle of all 
of  these  applications,  eco-friendly  production/operation/maintenance/disposal  principles  are  applied, 
to secure the final aspect related to green Air Transport System operations. 

Although a list of 6 topics is formed by application of the grouping applied above, it should be noted 
that the actual list of topics is much broader, and at the same time there are points of synergy between 
the various activities. 

To provide a few examples: 

•  In the Smart Fixed Wing ITD, novel high-lift configurations and adaptive wing structures will be 

investigated that are to a large extent also applicable to Green Regional Aircraft. 

•  In Green Regional Aircraft, the emphasis is on low-weight structures, e.g. through application of 
sensors  inside  materials  to  perform  continuous  health  monitoring,  that  can  allow  designers  to 
reduce  the  often  conservative  safety  limits  (and  associated  excess  weight)  imposed  on  aircraft 
structures. It is clear that these technologies are equally applicable to the large passenger aircraft or 
to rotorcraft, both of which will also benefit from weight reduction. 

•  In  the  Engines  ITD,  general  principles  will  be  investigated  to  reduce  emissions  and  noise. 
However,  the  implementation  in  the  three  different  aircraft  types  will  impose  significant 
differences  in  design  and  optimisation,  so  that  this  ITD  could  equally  be  redistributed  across  the 
three airframe ITDs. 

This illustrates that the structure proposed in the Clean Sky technological description is not a "hard" 
separation  into  discrete  projects.  Rather,  it  is  a  grouping  driven  by  management  and  exploitation 
principles,  allowing  each  of  the  topics  to  be  led  by  a  core  team  of  organisations  that  are  directly 
involved  in  their  development.  As  will  be  addressed  in  section  6.4,  this  approach  also  increases  the 
robustness of Clean Sky. 

The overall JTI operating budget of 1.6 billion € was established in a bottom-up approach where the 
budgetary  requirements  of  individual  ITDs  were  mapped  against  their  technical  objectives  as 
summarised in the table below. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
Table 4.1 

 ITD 

Budget 

Smart 
Fixed 
Wing 

Green 
Regional 
Aircraft 

Green 
Rotorcraft

Green 
Engine 

Systems  Eco-

design 

Tech. 
Eval. 

TOTAL 

€ million  388 

% 

24 

175 

11 

159 

10 

424 

27 

306 

19 

117 

7 

31 

2 

1,600 

100 

Commission and industry have, in the preparation phase of the Clean Sky proposal, worked together to 
identify  the  targets  and  topics  to  be  addressed  by  this  JTI.  The  ambition  is  to  address  all  relevant 
modes of air transport (with freight being implicitly covered, as freighters are typically derived from 
passenger  aircraft)  as  a  response  also  of  the  scenario  developed  by  ACARE  on  the  future  Air 
Transport System.  

Industry has made calculations of the budgets involved in reaching these targets using an interactive 
process;  the  evaluation  panel  in  2006  asked  for  a  budget  estimate  per  ITD  (see  also  the  response  to 
Q10,  listing  their  recommendations)  and  has  accepted  the  estimates  in  the  course  of  the  2007 
evaluation. 

Part of the justification for the € 1.6 billion overall budget (with €800 million Community funding) is 
that  actual  demonstrators  will  be  built,  in  order  to  ensure  not  only  feasibility  but  also  compatibility 
with  industrial  concepts  and  approaches.  JTIs,  being  the  top  level  of  FP7  instruments  in  terms  of 
integration but also of technology readiness level, are thus also required to demonstrate the maturity of 
the technological developments resulting from them. 

A budget reduction could be applied equally across all ITDs by reducing or removing the scope of the 
demonstrators,  but  as  outlined  in  the  previous  paragraph,  this  lack  of  validation  would  increase  the 
time to market. As a result, the beneficial effect on European competitiveness would be postponed or 
possibly nullified by the loss of competitive/technological advantage within the long time scale cyclic 
nature of the aeronautical sector. 

An  alternative  approach  to  budget  reduction  would  be  to  remove  one  ITD  from  the  package  of  6. 
However, as explained higher, this would severely undermine the impact of Clean Sky as not all major 
aspects  of  air  transport  would  be  covered:  either  one  of  the  3  aircraft  types  (large  passenger  planes, 
regional  aircraft  or  rotorcraft)  would  need  to  be  eliminated,  or  one  of  the  cross-cutting  activities 
(engines, systems or eco-design).  

Neither option makes sense: Europe cannot afford to lose its current level of competitiveness in any of 
the three types, nor is it possible to disregard the development of the horizontal activities as this would 
hamper the "greening" target of Clean Sky. 

Finally, the currently proposed membership of Clean Sky includes all major integrators in Europe and 
the overall participation has been selected through an open process based on technological excellence 
as  a  main  requirement.  An  FP7  collaborative  research  approach  could  not  possibly  create  a  similar 
know-how and R&D base. Furthermore, achieving the overarching goals for Clean Sky would not be 
possible through a pure FP7 collaborative research approach, due to the lack of alignment between the 
projects and the absence of overall coordination. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
4.4. 

Options short-listed and preliminary ranking 

The  conclusion  of  this  phase  of  the  assessment  was  that  Clean  Sky  is  more  adequate  to  achieve  the 
objectives stated in 3.1, 3.2 as compared to an FP-only EU action. Briefly, Clean Sky was assessed as 
the preferred option since it represents a large scale project which will promote a large additional 
R&D  investment  by  aeronautical  firms  to  pursue  ambitious  environmental  goals,  and  has  the 
capability  to  fully  exploit  the  economies  of  scale  and  scope  created  by  the  innovative 
multidisciplinary approach adopted.  

It was decided however, given the large scale of the programme and thus the risks associated to it, to 
shortlist  both  Clean  Sky  and  Collaborative  Research  Instruments  for  a  more  in-depth  comparative 
investigation.  The  results  of  such  analysis  are  discussed  in  section  5  and  6.  The  added  value  of 
intervening by implementing the Clean Sky JTI will be discussed in section 6. 

5. 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

5.1. 

Analysis of Impacts of a FP – only EU action 

5.1.1.  General Impact 

The Framework Programme is a key enabler to foster research at a European level and it enables many 
industrial sectors to maintain their position in the global competition. Collaborative Research in FP7 
will  bring  similarly  good  results  in  many  areas  including  aeronautics  as  in  the  previous  framework 
programmes.  However  in  the  current  situation,  the  traditional  instruments  of  the  Framework 
Programme by themselves are no longer adequate to answer the global challenges posed to the 
aeronautics industry in a timely fashion. 

The  question  is  to  what  extent  Collaborative  Research  can  be  an  effective  tool  for  developing  and 
demonstrating  new  greener  technologies.  It  is  very  probable  that  with  the  use  of  the  traditional 
instruments a good progress can be achieved in developing new and greener technologies. However 
there are special cases when a set of smaller projects cannot bring the critical mass for success. The 
aeronautics  industry  is  now  one  of  the  few  cases  where  the  level  of  progress  with  an  FP-only  EU 
action would not be sufficient to secure that the market failure discouraging new product development 
would be properly addressed. This is due to the need for a very quick action, requiring an integrated 
approach towards full-scale demonstration. 

Without answering these needs properly, the FP-only EU action option would delay the launching of 
new  products,  releasing  them  too  late  to  exploit  market  opportunities.  The  European  aeronautical 
industry is faced with heavy global competition, thus delay in launching new product in comparison 
with competitors will have a natural distorting effect on the business results of the European industry. 
In addition there are certain life cycles in product development and the aeronautical industry is not an 
exemption. So there is the risk that the results which are not used for the next generation of aircraft 
and rotorcraft will be obviously outdated by the time there is a product launch again.  

In  addition  there  would  probably  be  less  focus  on  environment,  if  the  FP-only  action  would  be 
adopted. 

5.1.2.  Environmental Impacts of an FP-only EU action 

As described in section 4.1.1. it is not easy to reach very ambitious objectives on one target area in a 
relatively short period of time through a number of individual projects. If there is a delay in delivering 
the  research  results,  the  less  polluting,  less  noisy  new  aircraft,  rotorcraft,  or  engine  cannot  help  to 
decrease  the  overall  impact  of  aviation  on  environment.  On  top  of  that,  ambitious  goals  cannot  be 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
achieved  using  such  a  fragmented  approach  and  the  contribution  to  the  ACARE  targets  would  be 
limited. 

There  is  a  very  high  level  of  uncertainty  on  how  much  the  results  of  stand-alone  projects  will  be 
deployed in product development. Timing is a key issue for the industry. If the research results are not 
properly evaluated, tested, demonstrated, there is a chance that they would not be incorporated into the 
next phase of the product development cycle, or there might be a delay in their implementation as a 
follow up action is needed to validate the results. On account of the uncertainties, it is impossible to 
forecast to what extent such a set of projects would have an impact on environment (e.g. on air quality, 
climate, water quality) and when this impact is realised.  

5.1.3.  Economic Impacts of an FP-only EU action 

It  was  described  above  why  it  is  difficult  to  forecast  in  advance  whether  the  results  of  FP-only  EU 
option have a direct positive impact on environment. It is even more difficult to address the indirect 
economic  benefits  of  a  project  targeted  on  environment.  These  projects  will  surely  strengthen  the 
innovation  and  research  potential  of  Europe,  but  the  impact  on  the  industry  through  commercially 
available aircraft is not substantial. A smaller project or a set of smaller projects (Level 1 and Level 2), 
can have some positive impacts on issues like competitiveness, macroeconomic environment, but in a 
short-term these impacts would not be substantial at the European level.  

If  the  research  results  are  implemented  with  a  delay  and  the  shortfall  in  public  funding  between 
Europe and the United States continues, there is a  risk of loss of competitiveness for the European 
aeronautical industry. It has been estimated that addressing the problem stated in section 1 with a set 
of smaller projects instead of with one solid programme may cause at least three to four years delay in 
launching new products. This delay can decrease the competitiveness of the companies concerned and 
thus makes a negative economic impact at the European level as well. 

If  there  is  no  delay,  but  the  industry  launches  a  new  product  without  using  the  benefits  of  the 
Framework Programme, then there is a danger that it will be done without a thorough research basis 
and the new products would be less efficient and thus less competitive than they could have been. 
The end result is the same as in case of the delay: the economic impact of an FP-only EU action would 
not be positive enough at the European level. 

5.1.4. 

Social Impacts of an FP-only EU action 

Social impacts are usually additional benefits of an industrial research project. Research achievements 
generate social benefits through a complex chain of impacts. Research results are usually not directly 
utilised  in  implementation,  but  they  are  integrated  with  several  other  technologies.  Therefore  the 
proportional impact of one smaller research project is hard to measure. Another issue is the uncertainty 
of implementation, as described in the previous sections.  

If there is a delay in implementation of the research results due to the fragmented approach, the social 
benefits  would  be  delivered  later  as  well.  This  would  mean  that  emissions  and  noise  generated  by 
aviation would grow at a higher rate for 3-4 years more than in case of using a single programme. An 
additional social disadvantage is due to loss of competitiveness for the European aeronautics industry. 
Because of the impact of a delay on the business performance of the aeronautical companies, jobs may 
be lost and the standard of living would decrease in the affected regions. 

Following an FP-only EU action, the aircraft developed in the next decades would pollute more than 
those developed within Clean Sky, resulting in a detrimental effect on health, both on European and 
global scale. Additionally, aircraft developed without the benefit of the Framework Programme would 
be  less  efficient.  The  higher  fares  resulting  from  this  will  limit  mobility  and  will  therefore  cause  a 
negative social repercussion. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
Quantitative social benefits of this option cannot be forecasted as the research project should be large 
enough  to  provide  a  basis  for  such  a  measurement.  The  uncertainty  on  the  extent  to  which  research 
results of a FP-only EU action could effect the social environment is very high.  

5.2. 

Analysis of Impacts of Clean Sky 

5.2.1.  General Impact 

One of the key findings of the ACARE SRA–2 is that European research needs to be more efficient. It 
has to be achieved by better coordination of work and less duplication. The European Commission has 
also  realised  the  need  for  more  efficient  instruments  for  well  focused  larger  research  projects  and 
introduced the Level 3 project in FP7. Aeronautics is one of those areas where such a tool can be 
and should be used. The industry is mature enough to work together within such a large project and 
on the other hand there is a need for an integrated approach as a response to similar initiatives in the 
United  States.  The  JTI  is  the  type of  instrument  that  can  make  the  necessary  positive  impact  on  the 
aeronautics and Air Transport industry. 

Clean  Sky  will  have  a  significant  positive  impact  in  many  areas.  It  will  decrease  the  environmental 
impact  of  aviation  not  only  in  Europe  but  on  a  global  level  as  well.  Another  effect  will  be  the 
increased  efficiency  of  new  aircraft  which  will  increase  the  efficiency  of  the  aviation  community. 
Increase  in  efficiency  within  environmental  constraints  enhances  market  development  and 
translates  in  increase  of  air  traffic  and  manufacturing  and  servicing  provisions  by  the  sector. 
There will be a demand for more employees and that is a very important economic benefit for the EU. 
An indirect effect of the increased efficiency of aviation will result in increased passenger satisfaction 
and higher rate of mobility. Prospect of step change improvements in technology and environmental 
performance  offer  the  potential  for  addressing  environmental  concerns  and  simultaneously  maintain 
and boost the competitiveness of the European aeronautical and aviation industry. 

5.2.2.  Environmental Impacts of Clean Sky 

Sustainable development is one of the key issues the world is facing nowadays. Without the necessary 
actions to decrease the environmental impact, the present industrial growth is made at the expense of 
the  quality  of  life  of  future  generations.  Clean  Sky  plans  to  contribute  to  efforts  trying  to  make 
industrial development more sustainable. 

Clean Sky will certainly have a positive impact on the environment. One of the success factors is the 
critical  mass  of  contribution  from  the  industry  and  from  the  European  Commission.  Industry 
commitment is very high in terms of resources invested and this will guarantee the utilisation of 
the  research  results.  New  generations  of  wide  and  narrow  body  aircraft,  regional  aircraft,  and 
rotorcraft  are  planned  to  be  developed  soon  and  these  products  can  benefit  from  the  technological 
advances  delivered  by  Clean  Sky.  Most  of  the  environmental  benefits  (decrease  in  emissions)  are 
achieved by lower fuel burn and so environmental and efficiency benefits are combined. As airlines 
seek for more efficient aircraft, the chance that a more efficient one in terms of fuel consumption will 
be successful is very high. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
Table 5.1 summarises the most important environmental benefits the Clean Sky will generate: 

Table 5.1 

Impact 

Quantitative28 

Qualitative 

Aircraft  emission  reduction  of 
new aircraft put on the market 

CO2  by  20  –  40  %  per 
seat-kilometre 

Positive impact on air quality and 
the global climate 

NOx  by  40  –  60%  per 
seat-kilometre 

Aircraft  noise  reduction  of 
new aircraft put on the market 

20 dB 

Positive  impact  on  millions  of 
European  citizens  living  in  the 
vicinity of airports 

Probably the most important environmental benefit of Clean Sky is to decrease the emissions of new 
aircraft launched around 2020. The project will thus make a significant step towards the achievement 
of ACARE CO2 and NOx targets. The realisation of the targets on NOx and CO2 emission reduction 
will cause a significant positive impact on the global climate and air quality. Effects will be positive 
not only in Europe but also at a global level. The reason is first of all that local emissions contribute to 
the global environment, but it is also due to the nature of aviation: more environment-friendly aircraft 
produced by the European industry will fly everywhere. 

Local  air  quality  around  airport  will  also  change  for  the  better  as  more  and  more  aircraft  flying  to 
European  airports  will  utilise  the  technologies  demonstrated  in  Clean  Sky.  Another  benefit  in  the 
vicinity of airports will be the noise reduction achieved similarly to the decrease in emissions. With 
noise reduction, fewer family homes will be negatively impacted. 

Due to the full scale recycling programme of the Eco-design ITD there are certain additional benefits 
in the quality of water and soil. Clean Sky will have a positive impact on water quality not only at a 
global level (cleaner rains) but also locally at the airport level because of the elimination of fluid-based 
actuators.  Recycling  concepts  will  be  embedded  in  future  aircraft  design,  production,  maintenance, 
and end-of-life disposal. If such methods are employed less waste is generated and the use of natural 
resources is limited.  

As presented above, Clean Sky will make a major contribution to the ACARE goals on reducing the 
environmental  impact  of  aviation.  There  are  quantified  forecasts  on  the  impact  in  terms  of  the  most 
important  target  fields.  The  following  table  is  the  summary  of  the  environmental  benefits  to  be 
achieved by each Technology Demonstrator of Clean Sky: 

28 

On the basis of industry estimations. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Table 5.2 

Impact 

Smart Fixed 
Wing 

Green 
Regional 

Green 
Rotorcraft 

Sustainable 
and Green 
Engines 

Systems for 
Green 
Operations 

Eco Design 

Aircraft  CO2 
reduction 

Aircraft 
NOX 
reduction 
Aircraft 
noise 
reduction 

12 – 20% 

10 – 20% 

26 – 40% 

15 – 20% 

10 – 15% 

10% 

53 – 65% 

15 – 40% 

10 dB 

10 dB 

10 dB 

15 dB 

17 dB 

10 dB 

NOTE:  the  Smart  Fixed  Wing  and  Green  Regional  columns  only  cover  airframe  contribution;  the 
Rotorcraft column includes both engine and airframe contributions.  

Thanks to the integration of the results of the platform, some of the positive impacts mentioned above 
will be additive to each other. For example a new wide body aircraft designed by utilising the research 
results of Clean Sky will probably incorporate the new smart fixed wing and the new sustainable and 
green engine. Therefore the benefits achieved in terms of CO2 emissions will be an approximate sum 
of the targets of the two Integrated Technology Demonstrators concerned. 

5.2.3. 

Economic Impacts of Clean Sky 

Although accurate quantification of the financial benefits of a research project is impossible, it can be 
stated  that  the  economic  benefit  Clean  Sky  will  generate  for  the  European  economy  is  substantial. 
Clean  Sky  is  a  green  programme  but  the  economic  benefits  alone  can  justify  the  significant 
investment of public money. One of the advantages of Clean Sky in economic terms is the provision 
of tools for the European aeronautical industry in the global competition. The reason behind that is the 
need  for  developing  new  and  efficient  products.  The  life  cycle  of  an  aircraft  fleet  is  around  20-25 
years. By 2010 about one third of the aircraft will reach the targeted lifetime of 20 years so there will 
be an urgent need for replacement. Narrow body aircraft (capacity of 110 – 220 seats) has the largest 
share in the aircraft segment (around 60%). Consequently, it is crucial that a new narrow-body product 
taking  advantage  of  new  technology  development  enabling  step  changes  in  environment  protection 
must  be  ready  for  this  important  fleet  renewal  process.  It  is  very  likely  that  without  Clean  Sky  the 
European  industry  cannot  offer  competitive  new  products  when  the  fleet  renewal  of  several  airlines 
will be at stake. 

The  other  very  important  economic  advantage  is  the  generation  of  new  jobs  through  the  better 
performance of the industry with more successful products. 

More efficient aircraft fleets will obviously help airlines to decrease their operational costs. This is 
especially  important  in  Europe  where  several  airlines  are  loss-making  and  thousand  of  jobs  are  in 
danger because of possible bankruptcies.  

On a macroeconomic scale Clean Sky will contribute to the economic growth of Europe. The ACARE 
SRA-2 states that the European Air Transport industry generates 2,6% of the European GDP directly. 
In  addition  as  the  growth  in  the  air  transport  industry  is  larger  than  in  many  other  sectors,  the 
contribution  is  growing.  The  contribution  is  also  substantial  in  terms  of  employment:  3  million 
European citizens are working in this industry. On the basis of these estimates Clean Sky will impact 
not only the air transport industry, but it will have a positive effect on the whole European economy. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
An  important  side-effect  will  be  achieved  through  the  stimulation  of  SME  involvement  into  the 
supply  chain  of  aeronautics  industry,  taking  into  account  that  SMEs  involved  in  research  represent 
around 3 million EU-15 enterprises. 

Cleaner and quieter aircraft will alleviate constraints as in air traffic growth, through opposition to new 
infrastructure  and  environmental  changes.  The  project  will  bring  positive  effects  to  the  enlarged 
Europe through lower transport costs and consequently more trade and tourism. On the other hand 
without  proper  actions,  such  as  the  Clean  Sky,  to  help  the  European  industry  to  maintain  its 
competitiveness, the growth in transport may be slower and thus the growth rate of the European GDP 
will be lower as well. 

Innovation and research potential of Europe will be strengthened as a large project like the Clean 
Sky would bring all key and leading edge players of an industry together and this would generate a 
spill-over effect on other initiatives as well. A large aeronautical research project will mean benefits to 
other  industries  as  well  due  to  the  resulting  technological  spillovers.  For  instance,  lightweight 
materials and eco-friendly processes developed within Clean Sky may be applicable in the automotive 
industry, where this knowledge can be turned into a commercial advantage (higher mileage for cars, 
novel electric actuation systems…). This research and development spillover effect will be one of the 
major economic benefits at the European level as described in the following table: 

Table 5.3 

Economic  Benefits  to  Europe 
(2010-2035)29 

Quantitative30 

Qualitative 

R&D spillover 

€450 billion 

impact 

spillover 

Positive 
through 
knowledge  transfer  to  other  sectors  and 
geographical 
limited 
aeronautical industry 

regions  with 

Added 
contractors 

value 

for 

prime 

€160 billion 

Added value in supply chain 

€190 billion 

Helping  all  the  European  aeronautical 
industry 
to  maintain  a  competitive 
position on a global level 

Providing  benefits  to  a  broad  range  of 
industries, including SMEs. 

Estimates  on  added  value  and  economic  additionality  in  Europe  have  been  derived  from  both  high-
level market forecasts and from data provided by individual companies on the investment required to 
develop  and  exploit  the  first  generation  of  products  that  will  be  able  to  benefit  from  the  results  of 
Clean Sky. In many cases this required access to commercially sensitive information at company level, 
such as R&D spending levels to be committed to new programmes and expected market share. Data 
from  individual  companies  was  cross-checked  by  Oxford  Economic  Forecasting,  clarifying  possible 
anomalies.  Overall  figures  are  quoted  which  are  turnover-weighted  averages  to  provide  an  industry 
level  view.  Figures  are  integrated  over  20  years  (2010-2030)  for  R&D,  and  another  20-year  period 
offset by 5 years (2015-2035) for market impact, as representative of a development programme for 
and the lifetime of an aeronautical product.  

29 

30 

R&D spillover benefits are expected from 2010 even if new products will enter into service only from 
2015. 
Amount in billion euro on the basis of industry estimations. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  initial  base  for  further  considerations  is  the  total  aerospace  industry  market  opportunity  that 
includes original equipment market (OEM) and aftermarket sales. This figure is derived from industry 
agreed  sales  forecast  based  on  factors  such  as  expected  traffic  growth  and  age  and  profile  of  the 
existing  fleet.  It  is  estimated,  for  the  period  from  2015-2035,  at  1500  €  Billion  and  includes  the 
potential business opportunity with respect to airframes, engines and systems. It is to be noted that this 
figure is gross, and "bought out costs" (costs for goods or services bought outside the company such as 
investments for production lines or labour) of about 30% are included.  

Considering  the  present  time  frame  and  based  on  expected  launch  dates  of  new  programmes,  it  is 
estimated that 2/3 of this market opportunity would be influenced by technology developed in Clean 
Sky.  At  this  point  in  time,  a  number  of  new  aircraft  types  are  already  too  far  ahead  in  their 
development phase (e.g. 787, A380) to benefit from Clean Sky technologies. In addition, one of the 
effects of the global market for aeronautics is that European companies participating in Clean Sky also 
contribute to aircraft built outside Europe. Thus, the market opportunity developing from Clean Sky is 
about 1,000 € Billion for the projected time window. 

The next step is the estimate of the R&D budget which could be accounted for as a percentage of the 
expected turnover. Again, the figure quoted is an average of individual companies forecast, and runs to 
about 10%, corresponding to 100 € Billion for the same period 2010-2030. 

In  parallel  to  the  R&D  expenditure,  additional  economic  output  (that  is,  turnover  minus  bought  out 
costs)  in  Europe  is  estimated  and  the  turnover-weighted  average  indicates  that  about  half  of  the  net 
world market opportunity related to Clean Sky will impact on EU economy, corresponding to about 
350 € Billion, divided roughly 40/60 between primes (direct additional output of 160 € Billion) and 
supply chain (indirect additional output of 190 € Billion). 

for 

The R&D spill-over benefits are estimated using the assumption that the average rate of social return 
across  the  G7  economies  is  close  to  100%  in  the  civil  aerospace  sector  (the  rate  of  social  return  in 
defence  related  activities  sets  at  30%  due  to  security  and  national  interest  factors).  This  assessment 
was  carried  out 
industry  by  Oxford  Economic  Forecasting  and  confirmed  by 
PriceWaterhouseCoopers31. The forecasting assumes for simplicity that the R&D expenditure related 
to Clean Sky is spread evenly across 20 years between 2010 and 2030. A 100% social rate of return 
means that every yearly R&D investment will generate the same amount for the following years in the 
relevant period. A 100 € Billion R&D corresponds to 5 € Billion/year in the period 2010-2030 and will 
generate 5 € Billion/year every following year in the period 2010-2030 leading to a cumulated value of 
about  450  €  Billion,  taking  into  account  a  reduction  factor  (about  50%)  for  spill-over  within  the 
European economy. This scheme is illustrated in the graph below. 

31 

Oxford  Economic  Forecasting,  PriceWaterhouseCoopers,  Rolls-Royce  (October  2004)  “The  wider 
economic benefits of R&D – research paper on spillovers”. mimeo 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
                                                 
€100 Billion R&D investment, 2010-2030

Annual 
investment

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Year

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029

Cumulated 
spillover

95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

SUM=

950

As an end result, the total additional economic output to the EU in the period 2010-2035 which can be 
associated to Clean Sky is the sum of direct and indirect industry outputs and spill-over, corresponding 
to € 800 Billion. 

The  average  European  citizen  will  also  profit  from  the  project  in  several  ways.  Households  around 
airports  and  heliports  should  spend  less  on  protection  from  noise  due  to  the  less  noisy  aircraft  and 
rotorcraft.  This  would  be  also  beneficial  for  local  authorities  involved  in  compensation  schemes  to 
households around major airports with noisy operations. The increase in mobility will contribute to the 
economic  development  of  peripheral  regions,  which  are  hardly  accessible  with  other  means  of 
transport.  Finally,  there  will  be  global  economic  benefits  as  well  as  airlines  operating  in  five 
continents will buy and use the more efficient aircraft, regional aircraft, rotorcraft and engines. 

5.2.4. 

Social Impacts of Clean Sky 

Any positive impact on environment has a direct positive effect on public health. Considering this, the 
largest social advantage of decreasing emission and noise generated by new aircraft and rotorcraft is 
the  positive  impact  on  public  health.  As  one  of  the  priorities  of  the  European  Commission  is  to 
maintain  or  even  increase  the  quality  of  life  of  European  citizens,  this  impact  on  public  health  is 
another justification of the public contribution to the project.  

Although  the  increase  in  airline  operational  efficiency  is  an  additional  benefit  of  the  project,  it  will 
have a huge social impact through the increase in mobility. The more efficient aircraft fleet of airlines 
can  result  in  lower  fares  and  most  probably  will  cause  higher  passenger  comfort  (less  noise,  more 
efficient operations). 

The  positive  effect  on  employment  by  generating  new  jobs  will  also  contribute  to  the  increase  of 
standard of living and quality of life in the regions where the aeronautics industry is present. Moreover 
there  is  a  positive  effect  not  only  for  a  limited  number  of  people  but  for  all  the  European  citizens. 
Investment into research has a high social return through spillover to other industries and generates an 
increase in the quality of life of the European citizens.  

Additionally,  the  commitment  to  care  of  environment  through  the  lifecycle  of  the  aircraft  –  from 
production till recycling – will affect workers positively, e.g. more attention will be paid to hazardous 
material used in production, maintenance, operation and dismantling. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
A  quantitative  social  benefit  is  calculated  by  the  decrease  of  the  social  cost  of  emissions.  The 
environment  benefit  can  be  measured  by  the  economic  value  of  avoiding  the  emission  of  a  certain 
amount of gases. In terms of CO2 emissions Clean Sky can improve emission of new aircraft by 1% 
per year over 20 years32 resulting in 30% overall improvement compared to emissions by the current 
aircraft generation. Estimations show that with the help of the Clean Sky the aggregated quantity of 
carbon  avoided  can  be  between  2  and  3  billion  tonnes  over  35  years.  The  social  cost  spared  by  not 
emitting this volume into the air is several hundred billion euros33. 

Table 5.4 

Social impact (2015 – 2050)  Quantitative34 

Qualitative 

Decreasing  the  social  cost  of 
carbon 

€700 billion 

Positive  impact  on  public  health,  quality  of 
life and standard of living 

6. 

COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

6.1. 

Ranking the options in terms of the criteria 

The  reasons  why  Clean  Sky  is  the  preferred  option  in  terms  of  the  criteria  set  in  section  4.1  are 
summarised in Table 6.1 and discussed below35:  

Table 6.1 

FP-only EU action  Clean Sky JTI 

a) Scale of investment 

b) Continuity of the research programme 

c) Leverage of private and public funds 

+ 

+ 

+ 

d) Critical mass of participants and multidisciplinary 
approach 

e) Co-ordination and integration between participants + 

f) Efficiency of the governance structure 

++ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

32 

33 

34 
35 

20 years after the new more environment friendly aircraft will be on the market, probably there will be a 
step change by introducing a newer aircraft. 
The Social Costs of Carbon Review – Methodological Approaches for Using SCC Estimates in Policy 
Assessment”,  AEA  Technology  Report  for  DEFRA  (UK  Govt),  December  2005.  The  median  value 
resulting from this study was used to quantify the social benefit. 
In billion €. 
Note that the assessment is made in relation to the objectives in 3.1, thus regarding projects that require 
full-system demonstration. The ranking –as indicated in section 3.2 p. 8- would be different if projects 
on basic research or requiring validation at the subsystem or system level were in question. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
  
 
 
                                                 
g) Technology readiness demonstration 

++ 

Note:  the  sign  +  indicates  a  positive  assessment  of  the  instrument  on  the  base  of  that  criteria.  The 
marking ++ indicates a higher score. 

a) 

b) 

c) 

d) 

e) 

f) 

g) 

Clean Sky JTI has a  budget (€1.600 million) focused on R&D  for greening aircraft (fixed 
wing  and  rotorcraft)  which  is  much  larger  than  feasible  with  traditional  instruments  of 
Collaborative Research.  

Clean  Sky  JTI  has  a  long-term  research  agenda  lasting  seven  years.  Even  in  FP7  a 
Collaborative Research project generally has a shorter duration. 

Clean Sky JTI has considerably more powerful effect in terms  of  leverage of private and 
public funds (see section 5.2). 

Clean Sky JTI has the necessary  critical mass and multidisciplinary approach, covering 
the  full  scope  of  aeronautics  technologies,  required  to  accelerate  the  development  and 
introduction of major technological advance for greening Air Transport (see section 3.2 for 
the articulation of Clean Sky in Integrated Technology Demonstrators (ITDs)). On the other 
hand a Collaborative Research instrument, due to the fact that the R&D effort is undertaken 
in different separate projects, will not allow achieving the objective of the action (see section 
4.1). 

Clean Sky structure and governance ensure a tight integration and co-ordination between 
the different ITDs, which is required to exploit economies of scale and scope in aeronautics 
R&D.  Such  integration  will  allow  avoiding  duplication,  exploiting  potential  synergies  and 
achieving  cross  fertilisation  between  participants.  The  role  of  integrating  and  coordinating 
participants is assigned to three elements: the Technology Evaluator, specific elements of the 
governance structure, such as cross-participation in the steering committees or the Clean Sky 
Director activities (see section 6), and finally external monitoring mechanisms. An FP-only 
EU action on the other hand, will not provide similar integration and coordination between 
participants.  

Clean  Sky  will  have  the  legal  and  governance  structure  able  to  provide  the  necessary 
leadership for achieving the research objectives (see section 6). A similar structure is not 
feasible with an FP-only EU action. As the majority of the Executive Board members will be 
from industry, the modus operandi will be quite pragmatic and business-oriented in nature, 
responding quickly to changing market conditions as these arise. 

Clean  Sky  ITDs  will  manufacture  and  operate  several  flying  and  full  scale  ground 
demonstrators36  to  validate  technologies  at  a  high  technology  readiness  level  (TRL  6)37, 
sufficient to provide the basis on which innovative greener products can be launched at an 
acceptable  risk.  Due  to  that,  Clean  Sky  will  accelerate  the  timing  of  new  product 
development. Traditional Instruments of Collaborative Research would not be adequate for 
the large demonstrators required for the step changes proposed in the Clean Sky programme, 
each one combining several new technologies. 

Thus Clean Sky has a greater potential to deliver major innovations and to bring early to market 
the  new  technologies.  By  including  the  demonstrators  needed  to  validate  technologies  at  a  high 

36 
37 

The demonstrators’ objectives and required characteristics can be found in part 2 of the Proposal. 
See  3.1.  Technology  Readiness  Levels  elaborated  by  NASA  which  are  presented  in  chapter  6  of  the 
report. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
technology  readiness  level  (TRL  6),  Clean  Sky  will  address  a  major  source  of  market  failure 
discouraging  R&D  investment  in  greening  the  aeronautics  sector.  Accelerating  the  introduction  of 
technological advances for new green aircraft is crucial as products in the aerospace sector remain in 
service for a very long time (~25 years). If a technology is not sufficiently mature to be incorporated in 
new products, it may miss a market window and fail to influence a generation of aircraft development. 
Moving fast in launching the JTI is of crucial importance since around 2015 approximately 5700 
aircrafts  of  the  world  present  fleet  will  reach  the  targeted  lifetime.  If  Clean  Sky  breakthrough 
technologies  will  be  ready  for  introduction,  such  fleet  replacement  will  contribute  substantially  to 
pollution reduction.  

The assessment performed by the panel concluded that Clean Sky has a high probability of success, 
due  to  its  integrated  approach  which  allows  to  fully  exploit  synergies  and  to  generate  technological 
spillovers between different ITDs; thanks to the role of the Technology Evaluator which will integrate 
the  technical  content  across  Clean  Sky  and  evaluate  the  merit  of  ITDs  R&D  activities  in  relation  to 
ACARE  targets;  and  also  due  to  the  flexible  and  carefully  crafted  governance  structure  which  is 
adequate  to  the  technological  and  managerial  complexity  of  the  programme.  The  risks  inevitably 
associated to investing a large sum of public money in a single programme with a great technological 
and managerial complexity are considerably reduced in the Clean Sky case.  

Clean  Sky  represents  a  major  opportunity  for  SMEs.  To  start  with,  there  is  a  target  to  place  a 
percentage of 12 % of the EU funds attributed to Clean Sky to SMEs38. In addition, Clean Sky will 
offer the possibility to work with major players in the industry. It will have a major role in integrating 
the EU industry, enabling new areas of excellence in the EU (new both from a geographical and sector 
point  of  view)  to  become  part  of  the  supply  chain  of  major  integrators.  The  internal  and  external 
control mechanisms present in the Clean Sky governance39 will ensure the transparency and openness 
favouring the participation of areas of excellence amongst Universities and Research Centres. The role 
of  academia  will  be  particularly  important  in  defining  the  simulation  models  to  be  applied  by  the 
Technology Evaluator. 

It  is  worth  noting  that  Clean  Sky  structure  is  structured  in  a  particular  way,  with  a  core  team  of 
members  identified  at  the  start  of  the  programme,  and  partners  to  be  added  later.  In  spite  of  the 
impression created by the fact that a large core team is already known, Clean Sky is an open structure. 
In an Annex, the openness of Clean Sky is elaborated, but the following points summarise the overall 
approach: 

The membership and partnership of Clean Sky reflects best practices within the aeronautical sector for 
participation  in  R&D  projects,  with  the  additional  requirement  of  widening  the  know-how  and 
technology  base  to  as  many  Member  States  and  Associated  States  as  possible,  compatible  with 
maintaining the level of technical excellence required to ensure meeting the overall objectives. 

ITD Leaders currently include all major European aeronautical integrators which have the means and 
infrastructure  necessary  to  carry  out  the  strategic  development  and  system  of  systems  integration. 
They also carry the majority of the risks through their commitments in Clean Sky. The team of ITD 
leaders  will  nevertheless  be  broadened  throughout  the  course  of  Clean  Sky  to  also  include  the 
Technology Evaluator activity. 

38 

39 

It should be noted that this is a TARGET, in the sense that excellence will still be the primary driver to 
accept participants into Clean Sky. 
See  for  instance  the  mechanisms  for  ensuring  openness  and  fairness  in  Clean  Sky  as  to  the  Call  for 
Proposal  and  Call  for  Tender.  A  1st  instance  reviewing  process  and  arbitration  Board  of  contested 
partner selection decision is chaired by the Clean Sky Director. Second instance review and re-opening 
of contested partners' selection decisions is competence of the Executive Board. And the Commission 
can veto decisions on the 2nd instance arbitration of contested partners' selection decisions. 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Potential associates have been gathered through an open process carried out at European level, and a 
first  selection  of  applicants  has  been  made  openly  and  transparently  based  on  an  objective  set  of 
criteria.  The  criteria  were  centred  on  technical  excellence  focused  on  Clean  Sky  needs.  Out  of  98 
candidates,  74  organisations  have  been  invited  to enter  into  Clean  Sky;  the  remaining  24  have  been 
invited to join in a later stage as Associates or Partners, together with any organisations that may show 
an interest capability at a later stage. 

The  initial  team  of  Clean  Sky  members  will  detail  the  programme  of  work  thus  allowing  the 
identification  of  more  specific  technical  areas  where  further  participation  will  be  sought,  either 
through further association of members or through partners selected via calls for proposals. 

These  Calls  will  be  public  and  transparent,  and  will  be  implementing  the  principle  of  excellence  by 
following an open and competitive process guided by the quality of the contribution and the value for 
money offered. Commission will oversee the correct implementation of the Calls for Proposal. 

The budget distribution of activities carried out by ITD leaders, Associates and Partners is in line with 
risk  sharing  management  of  long  time  scale  industrial  projects,  and  guarantees  that  the  challenging 
targets will be met in full and in time. 

It is appropriate to conclude that, within the specificities of the aeronautical sector, the breakdown of 
financial engagement and definition of technical responsibilities is the result of an open assignment of 
tasks within the aeronautical community at European level, constrained by the specific requirements of 
environmentally friendly technologies as envisaged by Clean Sky. 

6.2. 

Expected incremental impact of Clean Sky JTI  

The  Experts  appreciated  the  major  efforts  undertaken  by  industry  in  order  to  quantify  the 
environmental and economic effect of Clean Sky. The quantification effort was undertaken to comply 
with one of the key recommendations provided by the intermediate assessment40. In the Q&A session 
with  industry  representatives,  many  questions  were  raised  regarding  the  assumptions  on  which  the 
quantification exercise was based and clarifications were required as to the scenarios considered. Such 
requests  of  clarifications  were  satisfactorily  answered  by  the  industry  representatives.  Although  the 
difficulty  of  a  precise  quantification  of  the  environmental  and  economic  benefits  from  Clean  Sky  is 
evident, the analysis provided by industry was considered as a very useful exercise.  

The expected incremental environmental benefit from JTI was calculated by Industry by comparing 
a Clean Sky JTI scenario with an FP-only EU action scenario. In the Clean Sky scenario it is assumed 
that a 1st generation of new aircraft incorporating the Clean Sky R&D output will enter into service 
starting in 2015, and the new products will allow substantial reduction of CO2 emissions, NOx and 
noise. At the aircraft level, it is expected to reduce by 2020 CO2 emission per seat-kilometre of new 
aircraft by around 20%-40%, NOx by around 60% and noise by 10db to 20db (see 4.1). In the FP-only 
EU action scenario, emissions reduction in new aircrafts will be lower, as technology will arrive later 
to the market for the reasons discussed in section 5.1.2. 

40 

An  intermediate  assessment  was  undertaken  in  January  2006.  All  recommendations  issued  in  the 
resulting report were fully taken into account in the final Clean Sky Proposal from industry.  

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The estimates of emission savings at the fleet level over the 2015-205041 period on the assumption of 
50% market absorption of Clean Sky technologies by the running fleet (in the order of 10,000 aircraft) 
and  average  CO2  production  per  passenger*km,  due  to  new  products  incorporating  Clean  Sky 
technologies, are indicated in the Table below. Industry has estimated that over the period 2015-2050 
Clean Sky will lead to a cumulative reduction of 2 to 3 billion tonnes of CO2, suggesting that, although 
it  takes  some  time  for  the  new  cleaner  aircraft  to  replace  the  existing  fleet,  Clean  Sky  makes  a 
significant step towards reducing the environmental impact of Air Transport.  

Table 6.2 

Expected incremental environmental effect of Clean Sky (as compared to FP-only EU action) 

Estimated CO2 saving of fleet incorporating Clean Sky R&D output (2015-2050) 

2 to 3 billion tonnes CO2 (cumulative, 2015-2050) 

The  expected  incremental  economic  benefits  from  JTI  were  calculated  by  Oxford  Economic 
Forecasting (OEF), working closely with the European aeronautics industry. The starting assumption 
is  that  Clean  Sky,  by  bringing  innovative  technologies  to  a  maturity  level  where  they  can  be 
incorporated into new products, will act as the catalyst for substantial investment in new generations 
of green aircraft, engines, and systems entering into service between 2015 and 2035.  

The additional economic output created by the Primes and Supply Chain and spillover benefits arising 
from  the  new  generations  of  products  exploiting  JTI-supported  technologies  were  assessed.  Total 
World  Market  Value  2015-2035  was  estimated  using  Industry  forecast  which  considers  factors  such 
as: traffic growth expectations, the age of the existing fleet, predicted new programme launch dates. 
Next, the proportion of the new product market value that could utilise Clean Sky technology between 
2015-2035 was assessed.  

Each  industrial  participant  involved  in  the  drafting  of  the  Clean  Sky  Proposal  used  this  database  to 
estimate the potential business opportunity related to Clean Sky in respect of Airframes, Engines, and 
Systems. Each participant was asked to estimate the Direct additional economic output associated to 
their  activities  within  the  EU42.  Each  participant  was  also  asked  to  estimate  the  proportion  of  their 
supply  base  they  expected  to  source  within  the  European  Union  in  order  to  calculate  indirect 
additional  economic  output  and  to  provide  an  estimate  of  the  proportion  of  their  turnover  spent  on 
R&D in the European Union43. Using a turnover-weighted average, industry level data were obtained. 
Considering the period 2010-2035, the economic output created in the EU from the development and 
exploitation of JTI supported technologies, according to the OEF analysis, should reach approximately 
€800 billion (see section 2.7 of the Proposal). It includes a) additional economic output created in the 
EU by Primes and b) additional economic output created in the EU by the supply chain and c) R&D 
spillovers benefits to the EU. 

41 

42 

43 

The relevant table in the Clean Sky Proposal refers to the 2005-2050 period. The starting date was set to 
2005,  as  that  was  the  start  year  of  the  market  forecast  database  used  in  the  econometric  exercise. 
However the additional reduction in environmental impact of Clean Sky will began after 2015 as only 
platforms launched in/after 2015 are considered. The end date of 2050 was chosen to reflect that, due to 
the service life of aircraft, the environmental performance of products developed from Clean Sky will 
continue  to  be  significant  for  a  much  longer  period  after  2035  (date  at  which  the  1st  generation  of 
products developed from Clean Sky are expected to be no longer competitive in the market). 
This  figure  included  Labour  costs,  Profit,  Capital  expenditure  incurred  in  (or  in  the  case  of  profits 
repatriated back to) the European Union.  
Industry  clarified  that  the  estimates  provided  by  individual  companies  were  cross-checked  and  any 
anomalies investigated.  

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
                                                 
An attempt was then made to estimate the direct contribution from Clean Sky. The potential ability 
of  the  Clean  Sky  JTI  to  influence  the  additional  economic  output  created  by  the  aerospace  industry 
was explored by considering different potential scenarios. From such analysis emerged that the direct 
contribution  from  Clean  Sky  could  be  estimated  to  reach  around  12  to  20  %  of  the  total  additional 
economic output in the period 2010-2035, and thus would amount to around €100 to €160 billion. 

Table 6.3 

Expected additional economic effect of Clean Sky (as compared to FP-only EU action) 

Estimated  direct  contribution  from  Clean  Sky  to  total  "additional  economic 
output"  to  the  EU  (2010-2035)44  (12-20%  of  total  "additional  economic 
output") 

~€100-160 billion 

To sum up, although the difficulties associated to estimating market development over a rather long 
time  horizon  (2010-2035)  and  to  assessing  the  spillovers  effect,  makes  the  individual  figures  only 
indicative,  the  exercise  from  OEF  represents  sufficiently  convincing  evidence  that  Clean  Sky  will 
generate considerable economic benefits for the Community as a whole.  

6.3. 

Additionality of Clean Sky  

Clean Sky is expected to have a major impact in terms of “additionality” at the Community level. To 
start  with,  the  European  Aeronautics  Industry  will  invest  an  additional  €800  million  in  R&D  for 
reducing aviation environmental impact. Although this short term effect is quite impressive, the long 
term  repercussions  are  also  of  considerable  importance.  A  large  scale  long  term  EU  programme 
delivering demonstrators needed to validate technologies at a high technology readiness level will act 
as  a  catalyst  to  influence  the  magnitude  of  private  R&D  investments  in  product  development 
programmes. The value of industry funded R&D performed in the EU over 2010-2030 in developing 
new products incorporating Clean Sky technologies is expected to be around €100 billion.  

Clean  Sky  will  also  stimulate  national  governments  programmes  on  aeronautics  research 
addressing  environmental  problems.  Research  and  Development  remains  a  key  driver  of  the 
aeronautical industry. However, the cyclical nature of the sector implies that the baseline for assessing 
the impact of Clean Sky, varies substantially from year to year, while an R&D programme focussing 
on innovation technology has an intrinsically more stable character. 

The overall R&D expenditure in civil aeronautics in 2005 was 5.5 € Billion, representing 6.8 % of the 
consolidated  turnover  but  dropping  by  4.5  %  with  respect  to  the  previous  year  in  relative  terms. 
Private industrial investment accounted for 70 % of the whole R&D at 3.8 € Billion.  

The leverage effect of Clean Sky is expected to produce a higher degree of stability in the industrial 
investment and to promote further national funding. Germany has already increased the funding of its 
national Aeronautics R&D LUFO programme by 40 € Million earmarked for complementary activities 
to Clean Sky at national Level. Spain is considering a similar approach at the level of 100 € million. It 
is  expected  that  the  large  participation  of  organisations  and  National  States  to  Clean  Sky  will  carry 
sufficient critical mass to increase the leverage further. 

44 

R&D spillover benefits are expected from 2010 even if new products will enter into service only from 
2015. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Apart  from  this  direct  leverage  process,  the  alignment  of  national  programmes  with  the  JTI 
programme  (the  coherence  effect)  creates  an  implicit  level  of  additionality.  National  research  in 
aeronautics  is  likely  to  be  more  focused  towards  environmental  research  due  to  Clean  Sky.  The 
National State Representative Group (one of Clean Sky external advisory bodies) will act as interface 
to  relevant  national  research  programmes  and  provide  inputs  to  Clean  Sky  on  identification  of 
potential areas of cooperation. 

Finally the additionality can also be measured in terms of the direct contribution to total "" to the EU 
from the development and exploitation of Clean Sky supported technologies45. As seen in table 6.3 the 
direct  contribution  from  Clean  Sky  is  estimated  to  reach  around  €100-160  billion,  compared  to  the 
€800 million of public money to be invested in the programme.  

Setting the baseline to assess industrial added value is not so straightforward: a meaningful numerate 
assessment  of  the  impact  of  Clean  Sky  on  the  level  of  industry  R&T  expenditure  would  have  to 
differentiate  between  Programme  R&D  and  Research  and  Technology  investment  and  then  to 
distinguish  between  environmentally-related  and  non-environmental  R&T.  This  type  of  data  is  not 
available from published industry data. 

The  JTI  proposal  sets  out  the  broader  market  failure  arguments  that  underpin  the  case  for  public 
intervention both to increase general levels of R&D and R&T and in particular to increase investment 
in  environmental  technologies.  There  is  good  evidence  that  social  returns  to  RTD  in  civil  aerospace 
substantially exceed the average in Europe. Furthermore, in the case of environmental technologies a 
dual market failure (due to the impact on environment of aviation) arises suggesting that the impact of 
public intervention will be especially strong. 

Evaluating  the  extent  to  which  JTI  activities  represent  an  increase  over  that  which  would  have 
happened in the absence of Clean Sky will always be very difficult especially as, over the economic 
cycle, industry RTD expenditure will go up and down. However, one of the envisaged outputs of the 
Technology  Evaluator  could  be  a  better  evidence  base,  allowing  for  tracking  of  the  added  value  of 
Clean Sky in the course of the JTI activities. 

6.4. 

Risks associated with Clean Sky 

As a start, quantification is required of the statement "JTI not being successful".  

Various scenarios are possible: 

•  Individual ITDs not reaching in full their targets 

•  Failure of total JTI to reach its targets 

•  Failure of JTI consortium (e.g. by withdrawal of key partners) 

Individual ITDs not reaching in full their targets  

Probability: low to medium – Impact: Low 

As we are dealing with pre-competitive research, we must understand that there is a lot of uncertainty 
on  the  targets  that  were  set  forward  for  Clean  Sky:  quite  probably,  the  targets  will  be  met. 
Nevertheless, there is a possibility that they may not be achieved in full, as is there an equal possibility 
that Clean Sky will exceed expectations.  

45 

This  is  the  present  value,  in  terms  of  2006  euro,  of  the  flow  of  future  expected  additional  economic 
output over the 2010-2035 period. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Nevertheless, the impact on the overall JTI of an ITD not reaching all of its targets in full will be low: 
as  the  Technology  Evaluator  will  be  used  to  monitor,  assess  and  optimise  the  impact  of  the  various 
innovations across the ITDs, the possibility exists at Executive Board level to redistribute budget and 
resources between ITDs in case one of them is facing inescapable complications that prevent it from 
realising its goals. In other words, no money or resources will go to waste, and the overall impact is 
therefore quite low. 

In addition, as mentioned in section 4.3, there is a strong degree of interlinking between the various 
ITDs,  which  creates  a  degree  of  "robustness"  as  well  as  increased  confidence,  in  the  sense  that 
contributions  from  various  factors  add  up  to  achieve  the  desired  result.  For  instance,  in  the  case  of 
regional aircraft, the targets for emission reduction will be achieved through a combination of weight 
and drag reduction (leading to lower fuel consumption and thus proportionally lowered emissions), as 
well  as  engine  optimisations  to  reduce  emissions  of  CO2  and  NOx.  These  engine  optimisations,  in 
turn,  rely  on  a  trade-off  between  NOx  emission  and  the  production  of  noise:  cleaner  engines  use 
different operating parameters that make them noisier and vice versa. Finally, an increase in noise can 
partly be compensated by adapting a novel aircraft configuration where the engines are e.g. mounted 
at the tail or above the wings, to shield noise radiation to the ground. 

This  interdependency  helps  in  decreasing  the  vulnerability  to  individual  factors,  as  there  is  in  most 
cases a possibility to compensate through other factors. 

Failure of total JTI to reach its targets 

Probability: very low – Impact: high 

As explained above, the multitude of contributing factors to each of the JTI targets (the robustness of 
the strategy) makes it highly unlikely for the entire JTI not to reach its goals. Even if only one ITD 
achieves  in  full  what  it  set  out  to  do,  its  application  across  the  other  areas  will  already  create  a 
significant benefit. E.g. if the engine ITD succeeds in developing the new types of optimised turbojets, 
then the various aircraft types will all reap the benefits of that success. Equally, if the Green Regional 
Aircraft  succeeds  in  developing  its  low-weight  "smart"  structures  with  embedded  sensors,  these  can 
equally be applied to the Smart Fixed wing and Rotorcraft ITDs, partly contributing to their success. 

Failure of JTI consortium – withdrawal of partners 

Probability: low to medium – Impact: medium 

The most critical players inside the JTI are the ITD Leaders, who will all together be accounting for 
about 35-40% of the efforts within the project, and who have taken up the responsibility to exploit its 
results afterwards. Also, the risks are carried mainly by the ITD Leaders. 

The  probability  of  one  of  these  main  players  pulling  out  is  on  one  hand  rather  low,  as  each  of  the 
companies has already agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding signed at the CEO level. The level 
of commitment is therefore very high – also because a lot is at stake for each of them. In addition, the 
risk  of  ITD  Leaders  withdrawing  will  diminish  as  the  project  develops,  because  the  pressure  to  get 
return on investment increases. 

Nevertheless, even though it is in principle possible that one or more resign from Clean Sky, the effect 
will be serious but not disastrous as each of the ITDs is co-led by two members. This implies that there 
is always a back-up (albeit not necessarily of the same scale or scope), and that no ITD shall become 
decapitated should one of its leaders decide to leave the project. 

Clean Sky is much less vulnerable to departure of any of the other parties (apart from ITD Leaders) 
involved, as the scale of their contribution is an order of magnitude smaller, and alternatives can be 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
found for as good as all of them within Europe. The only foreseeable impact could be that a delay in 
the ITD work programme would result from the withdrawal of one of its participants. Nevertheless, as 
withdrawals are usually announced via internal frictions within the JU or alarming reports regarding 
the  condition  of  the  organisation  in  question,  it  should  be  possible  for  the  JU's  governing  bodies  to 
anticipate on potential trouble and develop pre-emptive backup solutions. 

While accepting that it is impossible to eliminate all risks in a 7-year long R&D activity as complex as 
Clean Sky is, it is felt that the governance and internal and external control mechanisms that are part 
of  the  overall  infrastructure  of  the  Clean  Sky  Joint  Undertaking  will  provide  enough  guarantee  that 
recovery actions could be implemented quickly if and when necessary. 

7. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

7.1. 

Preparation of the Governance structure 

Since the preparation of the Clean Sky JTI has started, monitoring and evaluation was one of the key 
issues considered. The European Commission, representatives of aeronautical industry, Member States 
and  research  organisations  have  been  working  together  in  the  last  two  years  to  achieve  a  good 
governance  structure  for  the  project.  The  outcome  of  the  work  of  different  stakeholders  is  a  well 
balanced, transparent, efficient governance structure. 

Regulators will be naturally involved in Clean Sky: this is a well-established practice in aeronautics 
industry,  which  will  also  be  applicable  here.  In  the  most  direct  form,  regulators  will  certify  all 
developments of Clean Sky for future application, but they will also be able to prepare legislation to 
ensure  a  swift  take-up  and  exploitation  of  the  innovations  resulting  from  Clean  Sky  –  which  can 
provide EU companies with an additional strategic benefit. 

7.2. 

Monitoring and evaluation 

The monitoring and evaluation of the progress within the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking is carried out 
both by external and internal bodies. 

The  internal  evaluation  is  first  of  all  executed  through  the  management  structure  of  Clean  Sky.  The 
first step is the ITD Steering Committee that manages, monitors, evaluates the work of the participants 
in  the  Integrated  Technology  Demonstrator.  This  Committee  reports  to  the  Clean  Sky  Directorate 
where the work of the ITDs are evaluated at first hand and then there is a strategic evaluation at the 
level of the Executive Board, which is composed of the European Commission, the ITD leaders and 
one representative of Associate Members from each ITD (rotation based). Another important tool in 
the evaluation is the Technology Evaluator which is a separate entity within the project, similar to the 
Integrated Technology Demonstrators.  

Although  Clean  Sky  has  an  efficient  management  structure  that  ensures  that  the  right  decisions  are 
made at the right time, when public money is to be spent there is a need for external monitoring and 
evaluation as well. There  are different  steps in the external evaluation according to the phase of the 
project:  evaluation  before  Clean  Sky  starts  (ex  ante),  continuous  monitoring  of  progress  during  the 
project and evaluation after Clean Sky finished (ex post). 

Assessment studies like the present one show the effort made in order to prepare the project to satisfy 
all the expectation and criteria. The special  meetings with the representatives of Member States and 
Associated  States,  the  deep  involvement  of  the  aeronautical  technology  platform  -  comprising 
industry,  Member  States  and  research  establishments  –  in  the  preparation  process  ensures  that  the 
Proposal is satisfactory to all stakeholders. 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
When  the  project  starts,  the  two  main  external  reviewing  bodies  will  be  the  Transport  Programme 
Committee and a new organisation, the National States Representatives Group. The main task of the 
group  is  to  monitor  the  progress  of  the  project  against  the  original  targets.  The  interface  among  the 
Group and Clean Sky will be the European Commission but direct contact with the Clean Sky Director 
is also foreseen. In addition to the two organisations mentioned above, ACARE will maintain the role 
it had during the preparation of the JTI: it will specially focus on the progress considering the Strategic 
Research Agenda which the objectives of Clean Sky are in line with. 

In addition, it is foreseen that an Advisory Board will support the JU (mainly through the Director 
and the Commission) in all scientific, technical, managerial and administrative issues. This Advisory 
Board  will  be  formed  of  independent  experts,  not  necessarily  restricted  to  the  aeronautics  field  or 
Europe. A representation of the airlines may also be a member, to represent the vision of the end users; 
to avoid market distortion, individual airlines will in principle not be directly consulted. 

7.3. 

Measurement of progress 

7.3.1.  Evaluation levels 

It  is  always  difficult  to  set  clear  quantitative  indicators  for  a  research  project.  Some  results  of  the 
project can be realised only if there is a proper implementation afterwards and this is usually out of the 
scope of the research projects. In addition the external environment changes during the lifetime of the 
project and accurate forecasts are not always easy to make. Despite these difficulties Clean Sky can be 
a positive example for progress measurement when comparing to other FP7 instruments. 

There are three different kinds of measurement to be maintained during the life time of the project: 

•  evaluation and forecast on whether the project produces the required results in terms of the benefit 

for the environment and for the competitive position of the industry; 

•  continuously  checking  that  public  money  invested  is  well  spent  by  sufficiently  following  the 

project plan and production of the deliverables; 

•  monitoring that the selection process for Associate Members and additional partners is transparent 

and fair. 

The  evaluation  of  the  progress  of  the  project  against  the  criteria  above  will  be  executed  at  the 
following levels: 

•  technical; 

•  managerial; 

•  financial. 

7.3.2. 

Technical evaluation 

The measurement of the technical progress implies evaluating to what extent the project has reached 
the  technical  objectives  indicated  in  the  Proposal  and  later  in  the  project  plans  of  each  Integrated 
Technology Demonstrators. Clean Sky has well defined quantitative and qualitative objectives defined 
for  each  ITD.  These  objectives  mostly  target  CO2,  NOx  and  noise  reduction  by  indicating  a  target 
range for the ITD. As Clean Sky will have full scale demonstrators, the evaluation of the work of each 
ITD against the original objectives will be much easier than in case of most of the research projects. 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
Within  the  project,  the  most  important  instrument  for  progress  measurement  is  the  Technology 
Evaluator. By using a holistic approach, the Technology Evaluator ensures the technical cooperation 
coherence  among  the  ITDs.  It  is  the  Technology  Evaluator  where  most  of  the  internal  evaluation 
during the lifetime of the project is done. It will measure the work of all the six Integrated Technology 
Demonstrators against the relevant technical project plan and the ACARE target. The Evaluator will 
ensure the consistency between the Integrated Technology Demonstrators’ activities and will help to 
utilise the research results of one Demonstrator in another one without duplicating research activities. 
The Technology Evaluator will allow a detailed assessment of the environmental benefits associated 
with  the  new  technologies.  The  Technology  Evaluator  will  also  use  the  help  of  research  centres  to 
measure  the  work  in  progress  towards  the  objectives  and  will  suggest  necessary  corrections  to  the 
ITDs.  

The management structure of the project will obviously take part in the technical measurement as well 
by using a bottom up approach. Detailed technical sub-objectives will be measured at the level of ITD 
Steering Committees and in the JTI Directorate where there is a Responsible Officer for each of the 
six  Integrated  Technology  Demonstrators.  Results  of  higher  level  analysis  of  progress  will  be 
evaluated at the Executive Board level and the results of this analysis will be shared with the external 
evaluating bodies through the involvement of the European Commission. 

7.3.3.  Managerial monitoring 

The  managerial  monitoring  is  executed  by  the  governing  bodies  of  Clean  Sky:  the  Steering 
Committees of the Integrated Technology Demonstrators, the Directorate and the Executive Board. A 
clear management and communication structure ensures the day-to-day management of the project and 
helps  in  the  strategic  planning  process.  These  bodies  are  also  responsible  for  the  administrative, 
managerial  monitoring  of  the  project  by  analysing  the  reports  from  lower  management  levels  and 
measuring the progress against the detailed project plan. 

The Director will be the legal representative of the project. The Director and the supporting staff in the 
Directorate will collect all the relevant information from the ITDs and will prepare most of the reports 
on the basis of the information received. The Director will report directly to the Executive Board. The 
personalised  responsibility  for  the  management  activities  will  help  the  monitoring  work  of  the 
European Commission and the external monitoring bodies. 

7.3.4.  Financial monitoring 

Besides  the  technical  and  managerial  aspects,  the  financial  management  will  probably  attract  more 
attention for the external evaluators of the project: the National States Representatives Group and the 
Advisory Board can continuously monitor how the important financial and administrative Clean Sky 
targets are maintained. The guarantee that funding received from the Commission is spent according 
to  public  interest  is  also  due  to  the  veto  right  of  the  European  Commission  in  issues  of  strategic 
importance. 

With  the  proper  use  of  the  management  structure,  fair  representation  will  be  ensured.  The  selection 
process  is  clear  and  indicates  that  the  actual  selection  will  be  transparent  and  satisfactory  for  all 
stakeholders.  Target  for  SME  involvement  (12%)  is  a  major  contribution  to  the  overall  goals  of  the 
European  Commission  in  the  Framework  Programme.  A  well  established  selection  process  can 
guarantee  that  companies  not  yet  part  of  the  supply  chain  will  have  equal  possibilities  if  they  have 
useful capabilities for the project. There is clear indication for the plan to incorporate universities and 
research centres, especially in the work of the Technology Evaluator. 

The  present  governance  structure  ensures  that  each  important  stakeholder  group  is  informed  on 
progress.  In  addition  the  structure  ensures  interactivity  partly  indirectly  through  the  European 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
Commission  and  partly  directly  through  the  management  of  Clean  Sky  at  forums  like  the  General 
Forum and different kind of information events. 

The issue of valuing the in-kind contributions will be handled using the following principles: 

The overall approach shall be based on FP7 modus operandi, where in-kind contributions in projects 
are assessed at review level. 

The Implementing Rules of the Financial Regulations shall be used as guideline. 

Additional items will be covered by International Accounting Standards. 

Assessment  of  contributions  will  take  place  in  accordance  with  the  usual  practice  of  the  founding 
industrial partners. 

Verification will take place via an independent auditor. 

EN 

35 

   EN