REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the application of Directive 2005/71/EC on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research
Date: 2011-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, admission of aliens, research body, research staff, scientific research

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 20.12.2011 
COM(2011) 901 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the application of Directive 2005/71/EC on a specific procedure for admitting third-
country nationals for the purposes of scientific research  

 
 
 
 
  
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Council  Directive  2005/71/EC  on  a  specific  procedure  for  admitting  third-country  nationals 
for more than three months for the purpose of scientific research (hereinafter 'the Directive')1 
was  the  fourth  legislative  instrument  in  the  field  of  legal  migration  after  the  Treaty  of 
Amsterdam  introduced  the  competence  to  legislate  in  this  field.  After  consultation  of  the 
European  Parliament,  it  was  adopted  on  12  October  2005  by  unanimity  by  the  Council. 
Denmark and the United Kingdom are not bound by the Directive. 

The overall aim of the Directive is to reduce obstacles to the entry and residence in the EU of 
third-country  national  researchers  (hereinafter  'researchers')  and  to  grant  them  intra-EU 
mobility  rights.  The  Directive  introduced  a  mechanism  which  was  new  to  the  then  existing 
EU  acquis  in  the  area  of  migration.  Specifically-approved  research  organisations  could 
conclude  hosting  agreements  with  researchers  on  the  basis  of  which  a  researcher  would  no 
longer require a work permit in addition to a residence permit. 

This report assesses the application of the Directive2. It is based on a study prepared for the 
Commission3, as well as other sources including ad-hoc queries from the European Migration 
Network4  and  discussions  with  Member  States.  Member  States  have  had  the  opportunity  to 
review and update the factual information on their respective countries. 

2. 

MONITORING AND TRANSPOSITION 

Member States had to transpose the Directive by 12 October 2007 (Art. 17), and communicate 
this information to the Commission. Between 2007 and 2011 the Commission held meetings 
with  Member  States  to  discuss  questions  on  the  implementation  and  interpretation  of  the 
Directive. 

In  2007,  the  Commission  launched  infringement  proceedings  under  Article  258  (ex-226)  of 
the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union  against  17  Member  States  for  not 
having  implemented  the  Directive  in  time,  or  for  not  having  properly  informed  the 
Commission of the adoption of national legislation implementing the Directive. Since then, all 
Member  States  have  gradually  adopted 
infringements 
proceedings for non-communication have been closed. 

transposition  measures,  and 

3. 

COMPLIANCE OF THE TRANSPOSITION MEASURES 

3.1. 

Definitions (Art. 2) 

Article  2  of  the  Directive  defines  'research',  'research organisation' and  'researcher'.  While  a 
majority of Member States have defined 'research' and 'research organisation' in line with the 
Directive, less than half of Member States have done so for the definition of 'researcher'. To 

1 
2 
3 
4 

OJ L 289/15 of 03.11.2005 
As called for under Article 16 of the Directive 
By the International Centre for Migration Policy Development ICMPD 
Available from http://www.emn.europa.eu under 'Ad-hoc queries' 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
complete the European Research Area and increase the attractiveness of Europe as a research 
destination,  it  is  important  that  all  Member  States  interpret  and  apply  the  definitions  in  a 
uniform way. 

3.2. 

Scope (Art. 3) 

The Directive applies to third-country nationals who apply to be admitted to the territory of a 
Member  State  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  a  research  project.  12  Member  States  have 
defined the scope in the same way as the Directive5. BE, EE, IE, FR, IT, AT, PT and RO do 
not incorporate all elements of the scope, while no explicit transposition measures have been 
identified in ES, LV, LT, NL and SI. In practice this does not seem to prevent third-country 
national researchers from availing themselves of the benefits of the Directive. 

3.3.  More favourable provisions (Art. 4) 

Some  Member  States  have  signed  bilateral  and/or  multilateral  agreements  offering  more 
favourable  conditions  to  particular  third-country  nationals  than  those  foreseen  in  the 
Directive. The main purpose of these agreements is to determine the applicable social security 
legislation and to ensure portability of social security.  

3.4. 

Research organisations (Art. 5 and 6) 

Approval of research organisations (Art. 5) 

Art. 5 (1) lays down the requirement for research organisations to be specifically approved in 
order  to  employ  researchers.  Member  States  decide  on  a  specific  national  approval 
procedure6. The duration of the approval shall not be less than five years and can be shortened 
only  in  exceptional  cases  (Art  5.  (2)).  These  provisions  are  complied  with  in  most  Member 
States7. 

LV,  LT  and  PT  have  only  a  general  procedure,  i.e.  one  not  specific  to  the  Directive,  to 
accredit educational/research institutions. Generally, this practice constitutes more favourable 
provisions  because  national  research  organisations  do  not  have  to  undergo  an  additional 
approval  procedure  in  order  to  admit  researchers  under  the  Directive.  Other  Member  States 
(EL, FR and AT) consider as approved all domestic public universities and require approval 
only for other categories of organisations. In SI there are no provisions on the duration of the 
approval granted and the approving authority has the right to examine at any time whether the 
research  organisation  still  fulfils  the  initial  conditions.  This  is  not  compliant  with  the 
Directive. 

Art.  5(3)  and  (4)  grant  Member  States  discretion  to  require  a  'written  undertaking'  from 
research  organisations  that  they  would  bear  the  costs  for  any  irregular  stay  and  return  of  a 
researcher, as well as a confirmation that the research work has been carried out8. DE, CY, 
LU, MT, AT, PL, RO, SI and SK have made use of these two options. BE, CZ, EL, IT, LT 

5 
6 

7 

8 

BG, CY, CZ, DE, EL, FI, HU, LU, MT, PL, SE and SK. 
In  most  Member  States  Ministries  of  Education  or  Research  or  its  subordinated  institutions  grant 
approval, Ministries of the Interior are only rarely involved. 
BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE (not transposed in the law, but as an administrative procedure), ES, FR, IT, 
CY, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, RO, SK, FI and SE. 
within two months of the date of expiry of the hosting agreement 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
HU  and  NL  have  transposed  only  the  provision  on  illegal  stay  and  return,  while  IE  and  FI 
have transposed only the requirement to confirm that the work has been carried out. ES, FR, 
PT and SE did not transpose any of these provisions. BG, EE and LV use the general wording 
of  the  respective  immigration  laws,  treating  research  organisations  as  sponsors  that  are 
committed to pay all costs in case of an illegal stay. 

The  obligation  for  Member  States  to  publish  and  regularly  update  the  list  of  approved 
research  organisations  (Art.  5(5))  was  transposed  in  19  countries9.  While  in  EE,  IE,  IT,  LT 
and  PT  there  are  no  legal  obligations  to  publish  the  list,  in  practice  it  is  available  on  the 
website  of  the  national  approving  authority.  Some  Member  States  publish  the  list  only  in 
official documents which can be difficult to access. 'Regular update' is interpreted in different 
ways, with some updates being done only on an annual basis.  

Under  Art.  5(6)  and  (7)  Member  States  may  lay  down  specific  conditions  for  refusing  to 
renew or for withdrawing the approval of research organisations, as well as consequences for 
hosting agreements and researchers’ residence permits10. 14 Member States have transposed 
both  provisions11,  whereas  no  specific  consequences  for  the  refusal  to  renew  or  the 
withdrawal  of  the  approval  of  research  organisations  are  regulated  in  BE,  BG,  IE,  HU,  IT, 
MT, AT, SI and SE. The provision has not been transposed by LT and PT.  

3.5. 

Hosting agreement between a research organisation and a researcher (Art. 6) 

In the hosting  agreement the researcher undertakes to complete the research project and the 
research organisation undertakes to host the researcher for that purpose (Art. 6(1)). Member 
States have addressed this provision in different ways, with the majority of countries applying 
only  the  hosting  agreement12,  others  requiring  an  employment  contract  instead  of  or  in 
addition to the hosting agreement (BE, EE, IE, ES, IT, AT, PL13), while LT and PT require 
only an employment contract. 

Art.  6(2)  obliges  research  organisation  to  check,  before  signing  the  hosting  agreement,  the 
purpose  and  duration  of  the  researcher’s  project  and  the  financial  resources  to  carry  it  out, 
her/his  qualifications,  sufficient  monthly  resources  without  recourse  to  the  Member  State's 
social assistance system, and sickness insurance. The hosting agreement must also specify the 
legal relationship and the working conditions of the researcher. This provision was correctly 
transposed  in  most  Member  States14.  AT  does  not  regulate  the  need  to  specify  the  legal 
relationship  and  working  conditions  of  researchers  in  the  hosting  agreement,  given  that  it 
applies  employment  contracts,  while  LT,  PT  and  SI  do  not  regulate  the  examination  of  the 
purpose  and  duration  of  the  research  by  the  research  organisation,  availability  of  financial 
resources and the researcher’s qualification.  

Art.  6(3)  gives  Member  States  discretion  to  regulate  the  need  for  research  organisations  to 
provide  the  researcher  with  an  individual  statement  of  financial  responsibility  for  the  costs 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 

14 

BE, BG, CZ, DE, EL, ES, CY, LV, LU, MT, NL, AT, PL, RO, SI, SK, FI and SE. 
During the background research carried out for this report no cases of withdrawal have been identified. 
CZ, DE, EE, EL, ES, FR, CY, LV, LU, NL, PL, RO and SK. 
BG, CZ, DE, EL, FR, CY, LV, LU, HU, MT, NL, RO, SI, SK, FI and SE. 
PL requires a mix of hosting agreement and employment contract, in the form of a hosting agreement 
signed  between  the  research  organisation  and  the  researcher  as  an  employment  contract,  contract  of 
mandate or task-specific contract. 
BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, LV, LU, HU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SK and SE. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
that would be incurred by public funds should there be an illegal stay and return. 10 Member 
States have transposed this optional clause15. 

Art. 6(4) provides for the lapsing of the hosting agreement if a researcher is not admitted to 
the country or if the legal relationship between the researcher and the research organisation is 
terminated. This is compliant in most Member States16. IT directly stipulates the lapse of the 
hosting agreement as  a  consequence  of the researcher not being granted  a residence permit. 
The  transposition  is  incomplete  in  EE  and  FR,  where  the  lapsing  of  researchers’  residence 
permits is regulated rather than the lapsing of their hosting agreements. DE and PL regulate 
the  lapse  of  the  hosting  agreement  in  cases  of  non-admission  of  researchers  to  the  country, 
without regulating the termination of the legal relationship between researchers and research 
organisations. No transposition provisions are foreseen in LT, AT and PT. 

Art. 6(5) obliges research organisations to promptly inform the relevant domestic authorities 
of  any  occurrence  likely  to  prevent  the  implementation  of  the  hosting  agreement.  This 
provision is transposed and compliant in the majority of Member States17. In EE, LV and NL 
the  general  obligation  of  notification  of  the  sponsor  under  immigration  law  applies  if  the 
third-country  national  no  longer  meets  the  conditions  under  which  the  permit  was  granted. 
The provision has not been transposed in FR, IT18, LT and PT. 

3.6. 

Admission, residence and family reunification (Art. 7, 8, 9 and 10) 

Conditions for admission (Art. 7) 

Art.  7  lays  down  the  conditions  for  admission  of  researchers.  Transposition  is  compliant  in 
almost  all  Member  States.  They  either  created  a  specific  'third-country  national  researcher' 
category,  or  considered  them  under  general  immigration  law.  Generally  Member  States 
consider researchers as bona fide applicants and offer them more favourable conditions than 
other categories of immigrants.  

Paragraph  2  allows  Member  States  to  check  the  terms  upon  which  a  hosting  agreement  has 
been based and concluded, an option which only BE, BG, EL, CY, LU and NL made use of. 
Generally  it  appears  that  if  there  are  doubts  about  the  application,  most  immigration 
authorities check the validity and the terms of the hosting agreement. 

Paragraph 3 obliges Member States to admit researchers once the necessary checks have been 
carried  out  and  all  requirements  have  been  positively  verified.  The  majority  of  Member 
States19  has  clearly  transposed  this  provision.  The  lack  of  conditions  specified  in  other 
Member States' national legislation in terms of admitting researchers to their territory in order 
to pursue a research activity under a hosting agreement could potentially hinder the access of 
researchers,  since  authorities  may  decide  at  their  discretion  whether  or  not  to  admit  the 
researcher, and this therefore appears not to be fully compliant with the Directive. 

15 
16 

17 
18 

19 

CZ, DE, EL, CY, LT, LU, HU, MT, NL and PL. 
BE, BG (transposed in the official template for the posting agreement), CZ, IE, EL, ES, CY, LV, LU, 
HU, MT, NL (general labour legislation applies), RO, SI, SK, FI and SE. 
BE, BG, CZ, DE, IE, EL, ES, CY, LU, MT, AT, PL, RO, SI, SK, FI and SE. 
However,  in  practice  research  organisations  in  IT  are  under  the  obligation  to  notify  the  relevant 
immigration authorities if the implementation of the hosting agreement is not possible.  
CZ, DE, EE, IE, EL, ES, FR, CY, LT, LU, HU, MT, PL, RO, FI and SE. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Duration of residence permit (Art. 8) 

Art. 8 obliges Member States to issue a residence permit for at least one year and to renew it 
if the conditions are still met. If the research project is scheduled to last less than one year, the 
permit shall be issued for the duration of the project. BG, DE, CY, LT, LU, MT, PL, FI and 
SE  transposed  the  Directive  literally.  In  CZ,  EE,  AT,  PT  and  SK  the  residence  permit  is 
granted for up to two years, in EL and IT for the duration of the research project which is also 
the case in BE, ES, LV, HU NL and RO, (with a maximum of five years for ES and HU). In 
FR, renewal is for one year and limited to a maximum of four years and in SI for the duration 
of the hosting agreement, but for no longer than one year. The duration is not specified in IE.  

Family members (Art. 9) 

Art.  9  facilitates  family  reunification  by  issuing  residence  permits  to  researchers’  family 
members  for  the  same  duration  as  for  the  researchers  themselves,  with  more  favourable 
conditions than under the family reunification Directive20. Member States may not impose the 
condition of the researcher having resided in that Member State for a minimum period of time 
before  family  members  can  join  him/her,  therefore  allowing  immediate  family  reunification 
and also enabling researchers to accept short-term projects and/or to be mobile. 

Most Member States have no specifications in the law that family reunification is dependent 
on the requirement of a minimum period of residence by the researcher. ES, CY and SI have 
used  the  exact  wording  of  the  Directive,  while  the  other  countries  have  transposed  this 
provision  by  not  including  the  obligation  of  a  minimum  residence  period  in  the  list  of  the 
requirements for family reunification.  

Almost  all  Member  States21  have  established  the  same  duration  of  validity  of  the  residence 
permit  for  family  members  as  for  the  researcher. Most  countries provide  a residence permit 
with the right to work. LU has not regulated the duration of the residence permit granted to 
researchers’  family  members,  although  in  practice  it  appears  that  the  duration  of  a  permit 
granted to a family member is the same as that of the researcher. In FI, family reunification is 
possible  only  when  the  sponsor  (researcher)  has  been  issued  a  continuous  or  permanent 
residence permit22. 

Withdrawal or non-renewal of the residence permit (Art. 10) 

Art. 10 allows Member States to withdraw or refuse to renew the residence permit issued to 
researchers and to define the particular conditions under which a permit can be withdrawn or 
a renewal can be refused, including the fraudulent acquisition of the permit, reasons of public 

20 

21 
22 

Under  Council  Directive  2003/86/EC  of  22  September  2003  on  the  right  to  family  reunification 
Member  States  may  require  the  sponsor  to  have  stayed  lawfully  in  their  territory  for  a  period  not 
exceeding two years, before having his/her family members join him/her. 
BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK and SE. 
As during the research work for this report no third-country national researchers were pursuing research 
activities in FI under a hosting agreement, it was not possible to gather information on the functioning 
of the Finnish procedures on family reunification. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
policy, public security or public health. All Member States have regulated these conditions in 
their national legislation23. 

3.7. 

Researchers' rights (Art. 11, 12 and 13) 

Teaching (Art. 11) 

Art.  11  entitles  researchers  to  teach  in  accordance  with  national  legislation,  although  a 
maximum number of hours or days spent on this activity may be set by Member States. The 
national transposition provisions are compliant in most countries24. 

Some  Member  States  (BE,  EE,  IE,  LU  FI  and  SE)  have  no  clear  provisions  regulating  the 
right to teach; however, since researchers under the Directive are exempt from a work permit, 
one may assume that teaching is permitted. In IT teaching is allowed only in relation to the 
research project set out in the hosting agreement. In LV teaching is allowed if this is expressly 
stipulated in the hosting agreement. 

Equal Treatment (Art. 12) 

Researchers  admitted  under  the  Directive  are  entitled  to  equal  treatment  with  nationals  in  a 
number of areas: recognition of diplomas and professional qualifications, working conditions, 
social security benefits, tax benefits and access to goods and services. EL, CY, MT, PT and 
RO have used the wording provided by the Directive. A number of countries25 made use of 
general anti-discrimination laws that prohibit discrimination on grounds such as sex and racial 
or  ethnic  origin.  SI  applies  a  combination  of  specific  equal  treatment  provisions  addressed 
particularly to third-country national researchers and general anti-discrimination law. It is not 
entirely  clear  whether  the  application  of  a  general  prohibition  of  discrimination  fully  meets 
the requirements of equal treatment under the Directive. 

In BE not all aspects of equal treatment have been addressed in the transposition26. The equal 
treatment provisions are not transposed in AT. 

In  practice,  at  least  as  far  as  the  results  of  the  survey  of  researchers  admitted  under  the 
Directive are concerned, they do not seem to experience discrimination or disadvantages. 

Mobility between Member States (Art. 13) 

Researchers  admitted  under  the  Directive  are  allowed  to  carry  out  part  of  their  research  in 
another Member State. If the researcher stays in another Member State for up to three months, 
the research may be carried out on the basis of the hosting agreement concluded in the first 
Member State27. If the researcher stays in a second Member State for more than three months, 
this  Member  State  may  require  a  new  hosting  agreement  to  carry  out  the  research  on  its 

23 

24 
25 
26 
27 

No case has been identified where a researcher’s residence permit had been withdrawn. However, cases 
of non-renewal were identified. For example 3% of all applications for BE and 22% of all applications 
for NL. 
BG, CZ, DE, EL, ES, FR, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL and PT; with time limits in CY, HU, RO, SI and SK. 
BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE, ES, FR, IT, LV, LT, LU, HU, NL, PL, SK, FI and SE. 
The requirement for recognition of qualifications has not been transposed. 
The only conditions foreseen are that he/she has sufficient resources in the other Member State and is 
not considered as a threat to public policy, public security or public health in the second Member State. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
territory. Where legislation stipulates a visa or residence permit prior to mobility, this shall be 
granted in a timely manner. 

Mobility of researchers has been incorporated into national legislation by 17 Member States28. 
In the other Member States, national legislation does not explicitly stipulate that researchers 
who have been issued a permit in another Member State can work on their territory without an 
additional  work  permit.  This  may  result  in  legal  uncertainty  which  will  hinder  the  right  to 
intra-EU mobility and may qualify as not compliant. 

3.8. 

Procedure and transparency (Art. 14 and 15) 

Applications for admission (Art. 14) 

Art. 14 obliges Member States to determine whether applications for residence permits are to 
be made by the researcher or by the research organisation concerned (1). It further states (2) 
that  while  applications  shall  be  considered  and  examined  when  the  researcher  is  residing 
outside the Member State to which he/she wishes to be admitted, Member States may accept 
an application submitted from their territory (3). Paragraph 4 requires Member States to grant 
an applicant who meets the conditions every facility to obtain the requisite visas. 

Most countries require researchers to make the application themselves29, with the exception of 
ES where it is the research organisation. Both options are possible in IT, CY, LT and SI. 

Initial  applications  for  admission  are  considered  and  examined  while  the  applicant  is  still 
residing outside the territory of the Member State concerned in BG, EE, ES, CY, LU, SI, FI 
and SE. They are examined while the researcher is within the territory of the Member State 
concerned in DE, IE, EL, FR, IT and PT. Both options are possible in BE, CZ, LV, LT, HU30, 
MT, NL, AT, PL, RO31, SK and FI. 

Whereas  in  a  number  of  Member  States32  facilities  to  help  obtain  the  requisite  visa  are 
provided, others have not provided them. 

Procedural safeguards (Art. 15) 

Member  States  are  required  to  adopt  a  decision  on  a  researcher’s  admission  as  soon  as 
possible and - where appropriate - to provide for accelerated procedures (1). Transposition is 
fully  compliant  in  most  countries33,  with  some  using  the  wording  of  the  Directive  whereas 
others set explicit time limits (for example seven working days in BG, or within two weeks in 
NL). In DE, IE, LT, LU and PL, no particular facilitation or acceleration is foreseen34. 

Paragraph  2  states  that  consideration  of  an  application  may  be  suspended  where  the 
information  provided  is  inadequate,  and  obliges  the  competent  authorities  to  inform  the 

28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 

BG (draft legislation), CZ, DE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, LT, LU, HU, MT, PL, RO, SI, SK and FI.  
BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE, EL, FR, LV, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SK, FI and SE. 
Applications may be submitted within the territory only under special circumstances. 
Applications may be submitted within the territory by certain categories of researchers only. 
BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, IE, ES, FR, IT, CY, LT, HU, MT, AT, SI and SE. 
BE, BG, CZ, EE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, LV, HU, MT, NL, PT, RO, SI, SK, and FI. 
Some  national  authorities  argue  that  as  long  as  the  general  immigration  procedures  are  effective  and 
efficient, there is no need to introduce an accelerated procedure specifically for researchers. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
applicant of any further information they need. CZ, DE, EL, CY, LU, HU, MT, AT, SI, SK 
and SE have specifically regulated the provision. 

When an application for a residence permit is rejected, researchers shall be notified about the 
decision  as  well  as  about  the  procedures  for  possible  redress  and  the  time  limit  for  taking 
action (3). The procedures are compliant in most Member States35. 

Where an application for a residence permit is rejected or a residence permit withdrawn, the 
researcher concerned has the right to mount a legal challenge before the national authorities 
concerned (4). So far no substantive case law relevant to the implementation of this article has 
been identified. 

4. 

CONCLUSIONS AND STEPS TO BE TAKEN 

The legal analysis shows that Member States have transposed most of the key elements of the 
Directive,  be  it  the  approval  of  research  organisations,  hosting  agreements  or  application 
procedures.  Yet  there  is  a  clear  need  for  improvements  -  through  enhanced  transposition, 
possible amendments to the Directive and better guidance and information provision. 

The  reinforced  Global  Approach  to  Migration  and  Mobility  (GAMM)36  provides  an 
appropriate context to strengthen the application of the Directive. The partnership frameworks 
under  the  GAMM,  in  particular  mobility  partnerships,  will  offer  opportunities  to  attract 
researchers from key partner regions such as the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood37. The 
need  to  improve  and  promote  the  Directive  is  underlined  also  by  the  low  numbers  of 
researchers admitted under the Directive (6,945 in 2010, many coming from India, China, the 
United States, the Russian Federation and Japan38). This is in stark contrast to the challenges 
at  stake  -  in  order  to  meet  the  Europe  2020  target  of  increasing  R&D  investment  to  3%  of 
GDP,  one  million  additional  researchers  will  be  needed39.  The  Council  calls  for  larger 
numbers of talented people to be attracted to and encouraged to remain within the European 
Research Area40. 

Attention should also be given to the objective set in the Strategy for equality between women 
and men 2010-201541, as there is still a large gender imbalance among researchers. 

Improvements can be made in several ways. Member States' effective implementation of the 
Directive  is  paramount,  in  particular  by  providing  clear  and  unambiguous  definitions  of 
researchers'  rights,  safeguarding  them  in  the  event  of  the  withdrawal  of  a  research 
organisation's approval, and by making clear distinctions between permits for researchers and 
other types of permits. Basic definitions such as 'researcher' and 'research organisation' need 
to gain a uniform understanding in all Member States bound by the Directive. The report also 
points to a number of areas in which the Directive may need to be amended. These include 

35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 

41 

BE, CZ, DE, EE, EL, FR, IT, CY, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK and SE. 
COM (2011) 743 final 
COM (2011) 248 final  
EU aggregate figures from Eurostat for Member States for which data are available. 
Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union. COM(2010) 546 final  
Council  Conclusions  on  Innovation  Union  for  Europe,  3049th  Competitiveness  Council  meeting 
Brussels, 26 November 2010 
COM(2010) 491, SEC(2010) 1079 and SEC(2010) 1080 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
clear definitions regarding the legal quality and format of hosting agreements, a more uniform 
way of updating and publishing the list of research organisations and possibly also the laying 
down of time limits for deciding on an application. 

Provision  of  information  and  raising  awareness  of  the  possibilities  the  Directive  offers  are 
important and the Commission is playing its part, mainly through the EURAXESS portal and 
the network of EURAXESS Service Centres as well as the Immigration Portal. Moreover, the 
mobility  partnerships  and  other  cooperation  tools  and  partnership  frameworks  under  the 
GAMM will be used to further improve the provision of information and awareness raising to 
priority partner countries. 

EN 

10 

   EN