COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS On the Response to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities and to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the Risk-Sharing Finance Facility
Date: 2011-02-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU policy, Framework Programme for Research and Development, financing

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 9.2.2011 
COM(2011) 52 final 

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

On the Response to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the Seventh 
Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration 
Activities and to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the Risk-
Sharing Finance Facility 

EN 

1 

   EN 

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

On the Response to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the 
Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and 
Demonstration Activities and to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim 
Evaluation of the Risk-Sharing Finance Facility 

1. 

CONTEXT  

Decision No 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 
2006  concerning  the  Seventh  Framework  Programme  of  the  European  Community  for 
research,  technological  development  and  demonstration  activities  (2007  to  2013)  (FP7)1 
provides in Article 7(2) the legal basis for an evidence-based Interim Evaluation of FP7 to be 
carried out with the assistance of independent experts no later than 2010. It stipulates that this 
evaluation shall cover the quality of the research activities under way, as well as the quality of 
implementation and management, and progress towards the objectives set. The evaluation was 
able to draw on a number of complementary assessments including the interim evaluation of 
the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) subtheme.2  

Based on a Commission Decision3 specifying the Terms of Reference, a group of 10 experts 
was appointed to carry out this Interim Evaluation. The group was chaired by Rolf Annerberg, 
Director  General  of  the  Swedish  Research  Council  for  Environment,  Agricultural  Research 
and  Spatial  Planning.  The  report  was  submitted  on  12  November  2010  and  is  available 
online4. 

The  Decision  No  1982/2006/EC5  and  those  of  its  Specific  Programmes  'Cooperation'6  and 
'Capacities'7, also required that by 2010 an evaluation of the Risk-Sharing Finance Facility's 
(RSFF) implementation should be carried out by a group of independent experts. The results 
of  the  RSFF  interim-evaluation  have  to  be  presented  by  the  Commission  in  the  form  of  a 
report to the Council and the European Parliament, on the basis of which they may decide to 
release  the  earmarked  second  tranche  of  the  EU  financial  contribution  to  the  RSFF  (up  to 
EUR  500  million)  for  the  period  2011-20138.  The  report  of  the  Independent  Experts  Group 
(IEG), composed of 6 members and chaired by Mrs Erika Mann, former MEP, was submitted 
on 1 August 2010 and is available online9. 

1 
2 

3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p.1 
"Catalysing European Competitiveness in a Globalising World" – Panel report of the FP7 ICT interim 
evaluation;  other  relevant  evaluations  in  the  domain  of  ICT  include  the  interim  assessments  of  the 
ARTEMIS  and  ENIAC  Joint  Technology  Initiatives  (JTIs)  and  interim  evaluation  of  the  Ambient-
Assisted 
Programme 
Living 
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/evaluation/rtd/index_en.htm 
C/2009/8412-1 
http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations  
Decision 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council – 18 December 2006 – Annex II 
Decision 2006/971/EC of the Council – 19 December 2006 – Annex III 
Decision 2006/974/EC of the Council – 19 December 2006 – Annex III  
Annex II to Decision No 1982/2006/EC, p38  
http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations  

Joint 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
This  Communication  responds  to  the  recommendations10  in  these  evaluations  by  outlining 
which actions the Commission intends to take or has already taken, but also indicating where 
no obvious or immediate solution exists.  

It is clear that a number of the issues raised, in particular regarding the design and content of 
the  Framework  Programmes  (FPs)  and  financial  rules  which  govern  their  implementation, 
cannot be addressed by the Commission alone, but will need the engagement of a wider group 
of  actors  including  the  Member  States,  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  working 
together. 

2. 

2.1. 

RESPONSE  TO  THE  SPECIFIC  RECOMMENDATIONS 
EVALUATION 

IN  THE  FP7  INTERIM 

To  advance  the  European  Research  Area  (ERA)  and  Innovation  Union 
objectives, integrating the research base….  

The need to overcome research fragmentation and build critical mass in research, both public 
and private, are still major issues despite the many achievements such as JTIs, ERA-NETS, 
article  185  activities,  co-funding  mechanism  in  the  Marie  Curie  training  activities  and  now 
first steps towards Joint Programming.  

Future EU research programmes must provide a clearer focus on the major research items for 
science, technological leadership and industrial competiveness and focus on the large societal 
challenges.  In  turn  this  will  provide  multiple  benefits,  including  more  coherent  priority 
setting,  a  better  capacity  to  leverage  private  sector  investments,  enhanced  European  added-
value and a stronger base for measuring impact.  

Such  an  approach  needs  to  be  developed  within  the  framework  of  the  European  Research 
Area, identifying areas of common or convergent interest, while ensuring better alignment of 
research capacities.  

The  Innovation  Union  sets  out  how  the  Europe  2020  objectives  of  smart,  sustainable  and 
inclusive growth can be achieved through a strategic and integrated approach to research and 
innovation.  The  forthcoming  Green  Paper  on  a  Common  Strategic  Framework  for  EU 
Research  and  Innovation  funding  will  launch  a  wide  public  debate  on  the  key  issues  to  be 
taken into account in future programmes. 

2.2. 

To develop and implement high quality research infrastructures…..  

The  Commission  recognises  that  infrastructure  funding  will  be  improved  through  better 
alignment of the FP, with funding from the European Investment Bank and Structural Funds.  

FP7 support for new research infrastructures targets the preparatory phase for projects in the 
ESFRI Roadmap and for some of these projects possible synergies with Cohesion Policy have 
been  worked  out  and  information  disseminated  to  project  consortia.  The  Commission  is 
confident that synergies should bring results before the end of FP7.  

Support for Integrating Activities (I3) will continue to be provided for the last years of FP7. 
The reinforcement of training related to research infrastructures in the People programme is 
an interesting possibility to be considered.  

10 

The headline from each recommendation is reproduced here, although the full text can be consulted in 
the relevant evaluation reports.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
Following the Europe 2020 Strategy a work package on innovation could be included in all 
research infrastructure projects thereby favouring greater involvement of industry. The work 
programme  2012  will  better  highlight  the  possibility  for  researchers  from  third  countries  to 
benefit from access to European research infrastructures. 

The  development  of  e-Infrastructures  will  connect  researchers,  instruments,  data  and 
computation resources throughout Europe, creating a seamless "online ERA". As an integral 
part of the Digital Agenda flagship initiative, this work will continue in the second half of FP7 
including  development  of  online  services  for  computation  and  data-intensive  research,  the 
upgrade  of  the  GÉANT  network  and  further  development  of  the  PRACE  supercomputing 
infrastructure.11 

2.3. 

The level of funding should, at least, be maintained…..  

The Europe 2020 strategy acknowledges very clearly that research and innovation are the key 
engines of societal progress and economic prosperity. In order to meet the objectives of this 
strategy,  the  key  challenges  which  need  to  be  addressed  at  EU  level  and  the  challenge  laid 
down  by  our  competitors  planning  huge  and  ambitious  investments  for  Research, 
Development  and  Innovation  (RDI),  there  must  be  a  credible  funding  level  provided  to  the 
research and innovation framework. 

As  proposed  in  the  Budget  Review,  a  common  strategic  framework  will  ensure  a  more 
efficient use of the EU's research and innovation funding by enhancing its EU added value, 
making  it  more  results  oriented,  and  by  leveraging  other  public  and  private  sources  of 
funding.  

2.4. 

A well-articulated innovation strategy is needed….  

The Commission agrees with the recommendation which is convergent with the orientations 
provided in the Communication on Innovation Union within the context of the Europe 2020 
Strategy.  

In  recent  years,  the  approach  to  align  FP  funding  priorities  with  the  technology  needs  of 
industry,  namely  through  encouraging  European  Technology  Platforms  and  the  support  to 
Joint  Technology  Initiatives  and  Public-Private  Partnerships,  have  not  only  increased  the 
industrial relevance of FP research but also, more fundamentally, have helped whole industry 
sectors to align behind shared research strategies. As set out in the Innovation Union, future 
EU programmes should strengthen this, along with stronger knowledge transfer mechanisms 
and  the  launch  of  European  Innovation  Partnerships  to  bridge  the  gap  with  demand-side 
measures (such as standard setting, procurement and regulatory frameworks). 

While Innovation Union commitments will only be fully implemented in the next generation 
of spending programmes, the Commission is already investing significant effort in enhancing 
the  innovation  impact  of  the  current  Framework  Programme.  This  will  be  achieved  in  the 
remaining FP7 work programmes, including through funding for projects which take research 
results closer to market (e.g. demonstration projects) and additional emphasis on innovation 
impacts in evaluating proposals. In addition, further funding will be provided for both SME 
specific  projects  and  topics  which  are  attractive  to  SMEs  or  organisations  that  are  'new 
comers' to FP7. 

11 

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/digital-agenda/index_en.htm 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
2.5. 

Simplification needs a quantum leap…. 

The  Commission  has  acknowledged  the  need  for  further  simplification.  The  Commission 
Communication12 on simplifying the implementation of the FPs, presenting a set of short term 
and  longer  term  options,  has  triggered  an  intensive  inter-institutional  debate.  While  there  is 
also a strong plea for stability and continuity as regards the applicable rules for FP7, a broad 
consensus emerges that fast progress should be made on three potential wins already on FP7:  

•  A re-definition of the criteria for the acceptance of average personnel cost methodologies, 
removing  the  criteria  for  acceptable  deviations  between  average  costs  in  a  personnel 
category and the actual costs related to the individual persons working in the projects. This 
would  allow  for  the  acceptability  of  majority  of  average  personnel  cost  methodology 
actually  applied  as  usual  accounting  practice  by  beneficiaries,  in  particular  in  industry, 
including the cost-centre based methods; 

•  Provision  of  a possibility for  owners  of  SMEs and natural persons  not receiving a salary 
registered in the accounts to reimburse the value of their work brought into FP7 projects by 
way  of  a  flat  rate  based  on  the  allowances  for  Marie  Curie  fellowships  in  the  People 
specific programme; 

•  Establishment  of  a  clearing  committee  between 

the 
Commission  implementing  the  research  framework  programmes,  in  order  to  achieve  a 
uniform  interpretation  and  application  of  the  rules  and  procedures  for  implementing 
research grants; 

the  Directorates-General 

in 

The Commission has on 24 January 2011 adopted the required implementing decisions to set 
the  above  simplification  measures  in  operation  without  further  delay  and  with  retroactive 
effect  for  ongoing  FP7  grants.  The  issue  of  interest  on  pre-financing  is  addressed  in  the 
Commission  proposal  COM(2010)815  for  the  revision  of  the  Financial  Regulation.  The 
revision  of  the  Financial  Regulation,  as  proposed  by  the  Commission,  is  also  essential  for 
achieving  more  radical  simplification  ('quantum  leap')  in  the  next  research  and  innovation 
funding programmes.  

2.6. 

The mix of funding measures in FP7 and successor programmes should strike a 
different balance between bottom-up and top-down approaches to research…. 

Significant parts of FP7 already provide bottom-up approaches to research. These include the 
Marie Curie Actions (MCA) for researcher training and mobility and the European Research 
Council  (ERC)  for  curiosity-driven  research.  Also  noteworthy  is  the  Future  and  Emerging 
Technology (FET) scheme which, through top-down thematic calls combined with bottom-up 
open calls is supporting multidisciplinary exploratory research in ICT.  

The move towards more bottom-up funding is set to continue, with the Commission proposal 
for further open, challenge-driven calls for proposals in the final years of FP7. Beyond this, 
the  Innovation  Union  has  committed  to  strengthen  the  role  of  the  ERC  and  the  issue  of 
bottom-up versus top-down approaches will feature strongly in the orientation debate on the 
next FP.  

12 

COM(2010)187 of 29.4.2010 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
What is most important for the FP as a whole however is to ensure a proper balance between 
bottom-up and top-down approaches. Further to the comments above (2.1 and 2.4) concerning 
future activity strongly focused on major challenges, it is important to remember that this will 
only succeed if it allows creativity and ingenuity to flourish at the projects' and researchers' 
levels.  

The  Commission  reaffirms  its  support  for  the  knowledge  triangle  concept  and  points  to  the 
ongoing work under the European Institute of Technology as also providing a major boost for 
the  education  component.  Also,  important  will  be  the  'university-industry'  forum  and  the 
'knowledge  alliances'  announced  in  the  Innovation  Union  Communication,  as  well  as  the 
development of appropriate skills for researchers to innovate as provided by the MCA. 

2.7. 

A moratorium on new instruments should be considered….  

The remainder of FP7 will continue to work with the current legal base and the existing set of 
instruments.  

However, the Commission will examine the current portfolio of instruments to identify areas 
for simplification, possible redundancy and potential gaps. Novel approaches such as prizes or 
innovative procurement schemes should also be considered.  

This work will be supported in a number of ways including discussions within the European 
Research  Area  Committee  (ERAC)  and  the  forthcoming  'Communication  on  Partnerships'. 
The resulting ideas will be reflected in the Commission's proposals for the next FP.  

Making  the  best  possible  use  of  the  EU  budget  will  require  gearing  funding  towards  more 
European  added  value,  stronger  impact  and  enhanced  leveraging.  A  common  strategic 
framework  as  mentioned  earlier  will  aim  to  ensure  that  all  EU  research  and  innovation 
funding works towards common goals and according to a shared strategy. This will in itself 
necessitate a development of a coherent and streamlined portfolio of instruments. 

2.8. 

Further  steps  to  increase  female  participation  in  FP7  should  be  taken  in  its 
remaining years…  

The Commission attaches great importance to this issue although notes, since the FP is only a 
small  part  of  total  European  research  activity,  the  limits  to  what  it  can  achieve  on  its  own. 
Real  progress  necessitates  a  common  approach  actively  supported  by  funding  agencies  and 
researchers across the European Research Area. In this context, the Commission accepts the 
challenge of taking a leading role.  

Further  to  the  current  activities  -  notably  the  40%  target;  monitoring,  awareness  and 
promotion  activities;  and  successes  under  the  Marie  Curie  Actions  -  a  series  of  additional 
activities are proposed. The Commission will:  

•  fully  implement  the  target  to  achieve  40%  female  participation  in  all  evaluation  and 
advisory committees – it will also seek the support of Member States to achieve this target 
for Programme Committees;  

•  launch  new  analyses  with  the  support  of  Member  States  and  research  institutions  to 
identify,  by  end  2011,  the  cultural  and  situational  factors  which  help  shape  female 
researcher participation, as well as measures to overcome these; 

EN 

6 

   EN 

•  reinforce monitoring in all stages of the project life-cycle; 

•  under  the  Marie  Curie  Actions,  reinforce  the  role  of  a  dedicated  Career  Restart  Panel, 
helping  those  who  wish  to  resume  a  career  in  research  after  a  break,  for  example  due  to 
maternity leave.  

2.9. 

To  pave  the  way  for  increased  participation  from  Member  States  that  are 
under-represented  (through)  improved  connections  between  the  Structural 
Funds and the FP…. 

A specific example of progress already being made is the Synergies Expert Group (SEG), set 
up  to  find  synergies  between  FP7,  the  Structural  Funds  and  the  Competitiveness  and 
Innovation  Framework  Programme.  With  members  from  academic,  policy  and  practical 
backgrounds, as well as the education corner of the knowledge triangle it will advise on both 
the current programming period (2011-2013) and into the next one, as well as on the future of 
FP7 regional actions. The SEG will benefit from recent analysis of synergies undertaken by 
the ERAC (European Research Area Committee). 

The  Europe  2020  flagship  initiatives  on  Innovation  Union  and  the  Digital  Agenda  have 
significant  implications  for  achieving  a  better  alignment  of  EU  policies  and  activities, 
including research, innovation and cohesion funding.  

The  Structural  Funds  should  provide  support  for  capacity  building,  such  as  for  research 
infrastructures  and  actions  to  deploy  high-speed  internet  across  Europe,  thereby  broadening 
the  base  of  EU  research  and  innovation  and  building  capacities  for  a  knowledge-based 
society.  

2.10.  Opening of the FP7 to international cooperation….  

FP7  is  already  very  open  to  international  collaboration  and  involves  participants  from  more 
than  160  countries.  But  both  in  finance  and  total  numbers  of  participants  the  scale  of  this 
collaboration is relatively small, notably with the leading and emerging research nations. This 
is a serious missed opportunity which must be addressed.  

Building  on  the  experience  of  existing  initiatives  such  as  EU  bilateral  S&T  agreements  and 
coordinated calls there is an urgent need for a more strategic approach.  

To this end the Commission will carry out a major review - to report by the end of 2011 - of 
its strategy for international collaboration. This will examine how to build critical mass and 
specialisation, in areas of European need and comparative advantage, taking into account the 
proposal  above  (2.1)  for  a  future  focus  on  major  challenges.  In  this  context,  it  will  also  be 
essential  to  better  define  the  common  and  respective  roles  of  Member  States  and  the 
Framework  Programme  as  well  as  the  means,  such  as  through  the  Strategic  Forum  for 
International S&T Cooperation, to identify areas of common interest and approaches.  

3. 

OUTLOOK  

In  the  final  chapter  of  its  report,  the  FP7  Interim  evaluation  Expert  Group  discusses  the 
implications of its findings and evidence, for the goals and implementation of future funding 
programmes.  It  underlines  that  this  will  need  to  support  the  implementation  of  the  Europe 

EN 

7 

   EN 

2020 strategy, including the ambitious objectives in the Innovation Union and related flagship 
initiatives.  

The  Expert  Group  puts  forward  the  three  issues  of  excellence,  competitiveness  and  societal 
objectives  as  key  to  the  research  agenda  and  priorities  for  the  next  FP.  These  coincide 
strongly with the broad orientations put forward by the Innovation Union.  

The results of this evaluation will have a direct bearing on future research policy, notably in 
the  forthcoming  Commission  Green  Paper,  scheduled  for  adoption  early  2011,  to  launch  a 
wide public debate on the key issues for future research and innovation funding programmes.  

4. 

RISK-SHARING FINANCE FACILITY (RSFF) 

4.1. 

Introduction to the RSFF and context of its Interim Evaluation  

The RSFF was developed at the request of the EU Council in December 2005 which asked the 
European Commission (EC) and the European Investment Bank (EIB) to propose a financing 
facility  with  risk-sharing  elements  for  the  support  of  additional  investments  in  RDI  for  the 
period 2007-2013. By pooling up to € 2 billion (up to € 1 billion from FP7; up to € 1 billion 
from EIB's own resources) in order to cover potential losses on loans provided by EIB and/or 
its financial intermediaries, the RSFF objective is to leverage around € 10 billion of loans for 
RDI activities implemented by private companies or public institutions with a higher financial 
risk profile. 

In  accordance  with  Annex  II  of  FP7,  the  EU  financial  contribution  is  broken-down  in  two 
parts: a first tranche of € 500 million for th e period 2007-2010; and a possible second tranche 
of € 500 million for the period 2011-2013,  subject to an Interim Evaluation. 

4.2. 

RSFF Interim Evaluation 

Implementing  its  work  in  the  first  half  of  2010,  the  Independent  Experts  Group  (IEG) 
appointed to carry out this Interim Evaluation concludes in its report13 that the RSFF appears 
as  an  innovative,  anti-cyclical  demand  driven  financial  instrument  successfully  introduced 
into  the  European  Union’s  research  funding  scheme  that  helped  drastically  to  expand  the 
financing for RDI. Highlighting that very considerable results on an EU-wide scale have been 
achieved since its launch, even above initial expectations14, the IEG also underlined that the 
implementation  of  the  RSFF  has  been  carried  out  in  a  highly  efficient  and  effective  way, 
building  enormous  knowledge  inside  the  EIB  and  the  EC  in  managing  such  a  new  and 
commonly assessed financial instrument, and serves as a powerful lesson and encouragement 
to  what  can  be  achieved  by  the  judicious  combination  of  risk-based  capital  from  the  EU's 
budget and EIB’s financial resources and expertise. 

13 

14 

The  IEG  report  has  been  presented  by  Mrs  Erika  MANN  (IEG  Chair)  and  Mr  Luc  SOETE  (IEG 
Rapporteur) to the ITRE Committee of the European Parliament, to the Research Working Party of the 
Council, as well as to the relevant FP7 Programme Committees. 
By end 2009, RSFF loans of € 6.3 billion were approved  and total investments in RTDI of € 16.2 billion 
supported,  thus  achieving  a  significant  leverage  effect  of  15  (EU/EIB  budget  sources  vs  total 
investments in R&D and Innovation supported); RSFF projects are located in 18 EU Member States and 
2 Associated Countries. Figures for RSFF until September 2010 are: EUR 8.1 billion of approved loans 
for 82 projects; EUR 5.3 billion of signed loans for 54 projects. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
Considering that RSFF is a model example to be further developed and intensified, the IEG 
made 10 recommendations that can be regrouped as follows: 

•  Current programming period 2011-2013: 

•  Immediate  release  of  the  EU  contribution  of  up  to  €  500  million  to  the  RSFF 
under the conditions foreseen in the EC FP7 legal basis – (Recommendation 1); 

•  Additional EU contribution of up to € 500 million to RSFF  for 2011-2013 coming 
from  EC  FP7  Specific  Programme  'Cooperation'  and/or  non-FP7  resources  – 
(Recommendation 5); 

•  Revolving  nature  of  the  EU  financial  contribution  to  meet  the  level  of  demand 

until the end of 2013 – (Recommendation 7); 

•  Improvements  possible  to  be  implemented  for  some  already  supported  target 
groups  (in  particular  SMEs,  Research  Infrastructures)  through  introduction  of 
specific approaches and change of risk-sharing – (Recommendations 2, 3 & 4). 

•  Next programming period post 2013: 

•  Continuation  and  expansion  of  the  scale  and  the  scope  of  the  RSFF  ('renewed 
RSFF') with  a  dedicated  revolving EU  financial contribution of no less than € 5 
billion – (Recommendations 7, 9 and 10); 

•  A  certain  degree  of  rationalisation  of  existing/future  EU  financial  instruments 
should  be  targeted  (avoiding  duplication  of  efforts  and  ensuring  synergies)  – 
(Recommendation 6); 

•  Regular monitoring to be ensured – (Recommendation 8). 

4.3. 

The Commission's response 

The Commission welcomes the detailed and thorough analysis of the IEG. 

As  a  positive  interim  evaluation  of  the  RSFF  is  a  prerequisite  for  the  release  of  the  second 
tranche of € 500 million of FP7 funding to the RSFF for the period from 2011 to 2013, the 
Commission  notes  that  this  release  is  strongly  recommended  by  both  the  RSFF  IEG 
(recommendation 1) and the FP7 Interim Evaluation Expert Group. By voting the EU Budget 
2011,  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  have  already  provided  their  agreement  of 
principle  on  the  release  of  the  second  tranche  (budget  of  Euro  250  million  for  2011).  The 
Commission  however  invites  them  to  provide  a  more  formal  answer  later  in  2011,  on  the 
whole period (2011-2013), if they deemed it appropriate. 

The  Commission  fully  endorses  the  recommendations  2,  3  and  4  of  the  IEG  to  address  the 
needs  of  currently  underrepresented  groups  in  RSFF  (i.e.  SMEs,  universities/research 
organisations  and  research  infrastructures).  Technical  negotiations  between  the  Commission 
and  the  EIB  are  already  taking  place  on  finding  concrete  solutions  and  new  approaches  on 
how  to  achieve  these  objectives,  including  in  particular  changes  of  risk-sharing,  portfolio 
approaches, increase of risk levels, and introduction of equity funding. This work will lead to 
an amendment of the EC/EIB agreement on RSFF implementation already in the first half of 
2011. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

The Commission welcomes the objectives of the recommendations of the IEG regarding the 
next programming period (post-2013). It notes that they are in compliance with the objectives 
of  the  Innovation  Union  Communication15  to  enhance  access  to  finance;  attract  a  major 
increase in private finance; and make more extensive use of financial engineering instruments 
in support of innovation16. Analysis is ongoing on how to concretely fund an expansion of the 
scope  of  the  RSFF  to  allow  for  an  increase  of  risk  sharing  for  both  R&D  and  innovation 
projects and how the EU shall be able to finance and support the implementation of ambitious 
new  objectives  (like  the  SET  Plan),  including  Europe  2020  Flagship  Initiatives  like  Digital 
Agenda  or  Resource  efficient  Europe.  The  Commission  and  the  EIB  Group  are  currently 
working on the  design of  an effective, efficient and  rational  use  of  financial  instruments,  in 
particular in the area of RDI, with a cross policies perspective. 

Finally, the Commission agrees with the recommendation of the IEG on a regular monitoring 
of the implementation of the RSFF and will undertake concrete action in 2011.  

15 
16 

COM (2010)546 of 6.10.2010. 
As  also  highlighted  in  the  Communication  "Regional  Policy  contributing  to  smart  growth  in  Europe 
2020" COM (2010)553 of 6.10.2010. 

EN 

10 

   EN