REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Annual Progress Report on the activities of the Joint Technology Initiatives Joint Undertakings (JTI JUs) in 2011
Date: 2012-12-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, aeronautical industry, hydrogen, innovation, joint venture, nanotechnology, new technology, pharmacology, renewable energy, research and development

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 14.12.2012  
COM(2012) 758 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

Annual Progress Report on the activities of the Joint Technology Initiatives Joint 
Undertakings (JTI JUs) in 2011 

{SWD(2012) 430 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

Annual Progress Report on the activities of the Joint Technology Initiatives Joint 
Undertakings (JTI JUs) in 2011 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The  Joint  Technology  Initiatives  are  a  novel  way  of  forming  public-private  partnerships  in 
industrial  research  at  European  level.  They  were  set  up  as  pilots  in  2007-2008  under  the 
Seventh Framework Programme1 in five strategic areas — aeronautics and air transport (the 
Clean Sky initiative), public health (the  Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)), fuel  cell and 
hydrogen technologies (the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen (FCH) initiative), embedded computing 
systems  (the  ARTEMIS  initiative)  and  nanoelectronics  (the  ENIAC  initiative).  The  SESAR2 
(Single  European  Sky  Air  Traffic  Management  Research)  programme  should  also  be 
mentioned  since  it  is  funded  under  the  Seventh  Framework  Programme.  Bringing  together 
industry, the research community, regulators and the EU to define common research agendas 
and  invest  in  large-scale  multinational  research  activities,  the  JTIs  represent  an  intriguing 
opportunity,  especially  in  a  global  economic  downturn,  for  Europe  to  strengthen  its 
competitiveness based on the principles of scientific excellence, openness and innovation. 

An  annual  report  on  the  progress  achieved  by  the  Joint  Technology  Initiatives  Joint 
Undertakings  (‘JTI  JUs’)  is  required  by  Article  11(1)  of  the  Council  Regulations  setting  up 
the  individual  JTIs,  which  state  that  ‘the  Commission  shall  present  to  the  European 
Parliament and to the Council an annual report on the progress achieved by the [name of the 
JTI] Joint Undertaking. This report shall contain details of implementation including number 
of  proposals  submitted,  number  of  proposals  selected  for  funding,  type  of  participants, 
including SMEs, and country statistics’. 

This 2011 annual report follows the first interim evaluations of the Joint Undertakings carried 
out under Article 11(2) of the Council Regulations. It provides information to the European 
Parliament and the Council and outlines the progress achieved by the JTI JUs since they were 
set up. 

The report starts with a brief introduction of the JTI JUs, summarises their key achievements 
in  2011  and  outlines  the  areas  of  improvement  in  the  future.  It  is  accompanied  by  a 
Commission  Staff  Working  Document  mainly  quantifying  the  research  activities  of  the 
respective JTI JUs in 2011. Moreover, it includes updated information on results and progress 
relating to calls launched in previous years. 

1 

2 

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 (2007-13), OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p. 1. 
This document does not report on the SESAR JU. Although the SESAR JU has the same legal basis as 
the other JUs, it is funded under the Seventh Framework Programme and the trans-European Transport 
Networks  Programmes,  over  a  different  lifetime,  and  has  different  governance  and  reporting 
mechanisms from the other JUs. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

THE JTI JUS  

The Joint Technology Initiatives were set up in the form of Joint Undertakings under Article 
187 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, which states that ‘the Union may set up joint 
undertakings  or  any  other  structure  necessary  for  the  efficient  execution  of  Union  research, 
technological  development  and  demonstration  programmes’.  They  are  ‘Community  bodies’ 
under  Article  185  of  the  EU  Financial  Regulation3.  They  were  a  major  new  feature  of  the 
Seventh  Framework  Programme  (FP7),  introduced  to  support  key  areas  of  research  and 
technological development that can contribute to Europe’s competitiveness and quality of life 
but that were not best served by existing FP7 instruments4. 

Under the FP7 ‘Cooperation’ Specific Programme, five JTI JUs were set up in 2007-2008 for 
the period to 31 December 2017: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

Aeronautics  and  Air  Transport  (Clean  Sky)  JU,  increasing  the  competitiveness  of 
the  European  aeronautics  industry  while  reducing  emissions  and  noise,  established 
by Council Regulation (EC) 71/2008 of 20 December 2007; 

Innovative  Medicines  Initiative  (IMI)  JU,  fostering  the  development  of  better  and 
safer medicines for patients, established by Council Regulation (EC) 73/2008 of 20 
December 2007; 

Fuel Cells and Hydrogen (FCH) JU, speeding up the development and deployment 
of  hydrogen  supply  and  fuel  cell  technologies,  established  by  Council  Regulation 
(EC) 521/2008 of 30 May 2008; 

Embedded  Computing  Systems  (ARTEMIS)  JU,  helping  the  European  industry  to 
consolidate and reinforce its world leadership in embedded computing technologies, 
established by Council Regulation (EC) 74/2008 of 20 December 2007; 

Nanoelectronics  (ENIAC)  JU, 
level  of 
miniaturisation  required  for  the  next  generation  of  nanoelectronics  components, 
established by Council Regulation (EC) 72/2008 of 20 December 2007. 

to  achieve  a  very  high 

targeting 

The European Commission, as a co-founding member, was responsible for starting up the JTI 
JUs.  Once  they  had  built  up  their  legal  and  financial  framework  and  demonstrated  their 
capacity to manage their own budgets, ARTEMIS, IMI and Clean Sky were given autonomy 
in October-November 2009, followed by ENIAC in May and FCH in November 2010. Thus, 
2011 was the first full year in which all the JTI JUs operated autonomously. 

The  Joint  Undertakings  select  projects  through  annual  open  and  competitive  calls  for 
proposals following one- or two-stage submission and evaluation. They  provide funding  for 
collaborative  projects  and  coordination  and  support  actions.  The  calls  for  proposals 
launched by the Clean Sky JU are more specific in scope, of shorter duration and demanding 
expected results at higher technology-readiness levels. Clean Sky publishes several calls per 
year. 

3 

4 

Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable 
to the general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. 
Commission  Staff  Working  Document  ‘Joint  Technology  Initiatives:  Background,  State-of-Play  and 
Main Features’, SEC(2007) 692, Brussels, 15.5.2007. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED IN 2011 AND MAJOR CHALLENGES 

3.1. 

Outcome of the first interim evaluation 

The Council Regulations setting them up require two interim evaluations of the JUs. The first 
interim  evaluation  was  performed  on  time  and  assessed  their  quality  and  efficiency  and  the 
progress  achieved  towards  their  objectives.  All  the  reports  concluded  with  a  favourable 
opinion; they agreed that the JUs should continue beyond 2013 and took a common position 
on  the  following  matters.  First,  the  evaluation  panels  supported  the  Sherpa  Group’s 
recommendations5,  in  particular  ‘that  the  current  legal  framework  be  streamlined  to  fit  the 
purposes of setting up and implementing future JTIs’. In this respect, the current ‘Community 
body’  status  of  JTIs  should  be  reviewed.  They  recommended  reinforcing  and  streamlining 
processes  and  decision-making.  They  also  referred  to  the  need  for  more  structured 
coordination  and  complementarity  with  FP7  and  national  programmes  and  funds;  for 
improved communication, to enhance the visibility of JTI actions aimed at the general public 
and at international level; and for systematic data collection and a monitoring system for key 
performance indicators. 

The panels identified specific issues and challenges and made a series of recommendations for 
action by the various stakeholders (JUs, the European Commission, industry, Member States, 
Governing Boards, etc.). Details of the evaluations are given in the Commission Staff Working 
Document. 

The Commission’s response to the evaluations of Clean Sky, IMI and FCH was published as a 
staff  working  paper  with  the  communication  Partnering  in  Research  and  Innovation 
(COM(2011) 572),  in  September  2011.  Its  communication  First  interim  evaluation  of  the 
ARTEMIS and ENIAC Joint Technology Initiatives (COM(2010) 752) was published, with a 
staff working paper detailing its response, in December 2010. 

For the Clean Sky, IMI and FCH JUs, the panels recommended prompt action on improving 
communication  with  citizens,  setting-up  key  performance  indicators  and  making  the  JUs’ 
Executive Directors, rather than the Governing Boards, responsible for matters pertaining to 
day-to-day management. For ENIAC and ARTEMIS, the panel made 18 recommendations for 
Member States, industry, the Commission and the JUs. It urged Member States to make multi-
annual budgetary commitments and industry and the JUs to make a stronger commitment to 
implementing the European strategy. The Commission was advised to gather data for future 
evaluation of the JTI JUs. 

3.2. 

Strategic Research Agenda 

The strategic research agendas (SRAs) were revised to set new priorities for the JUs, to meet 
current  challenges  and  to  take  into  account  the  industrial  progress  achieved  in  recent  years. 
Most JUs started this work in 2010 and completed it in 2011. 

5 

The Sherpa Group was called on by the Commission in July 2009 to take stock of initial experience of 
setting up JTIs under FP7. Its members came from industry partners of the JTIs and the Recovery Plan 
public-private  partnerships.  Meetings  were  chaired  by  the  Director-General  of  DG  RTD  and  also 
attended  by  various  Commission  staff.  For  its  conclusions  and  recommendations,  see  the  report 
‘Designing  together  the  ‘ideal  house’  for  public-private  partnerships  in  European  research’  (January 
2010), at: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/docs/jti/jti-sherpas-report-2010_en.pdf. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  aeronautics,  the  targets  set  for  Clean  Sky  JU  were  reassessed,  updating  the  development 
plan  and  prediction  of  the  environmental  benefits  to  be  expected  by  the  end  of  the 
programme.  In  the  pharmaceutical  sector,  the  Innovative  Medicines  Initiative’s  SRA  was 
revised to reflect scientific advances and changes in the industry. This update was completed 
in 2011, focusing on large scale, game-changing projects and setting eight new priorities. 

The strategic research and demonstration priorities of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen JU were 
also revised in 2011. New targets were set in the Multi-Annual Implementation Plan (MAIP) 
for the four FCH application areas, to reflect technical and scientific progress made since the 
first MAIP. As a result, some topics will no longer be considered in future calls and six new 
ones will be introduced. The revised targets were also extended to 2020, to align them with 
the next framework programme, Horizon 2020. 

For  embedded  computing  systems,  new  technical  options  and  challenges  have  arisen  since 
2006  when  the  ARTEMIS  European  Technology  Platform  issued  its  first  SRA,  so  the 
ARTEMIS SRA was also updated and research priorities for the development and adoption of 
key technologies across different application areas were reviewed. The revised SRA gives a 
clear idea of what is needed in Europe in the next decade from all R&I players to allow the 
emergence of new markets and applications important to society. 

For ENIAC JU and nanoelectronics components, there were calls for all the technology fields 
and  9  of  the  16  application  fields  in  2011.  The  next  2012  calls  will  include  all  applications 
and technology fields. 

3.3. 

Communication and administration 

One of the objectives that the interim evaluations wished to see for the Joint Undertakings in 
2011  was  to  take  a  more  proactive  and  target-oriented  approach  to  their  communication 
activities, especially with SMEs and the research community to increase their participation in 
the  research  projects.  They  recommended  that  the  JTI  JUs  develop  and  implement  clear 
communication  and  dissemination  plans,  establish  a  separate  identity  and  work  more  on 
synergies with national programmes and international cooperation with non-EU stakeholders. 

In  2011  special  attention  was  in  fact  given  to  communication,  stressing  promotion  of  JU 
activities  among  European  citizens  and  dissemination  of  initial  results.  Clean  Sky  and  FCH 
both acquired new websites. Factsheets were updated, a newsletter (from IMI and Clean Sky) 
and  a  paper  magazine  (ARTEMIS)  were  circulated  regularly  and  some  press  releases  on 
significant  achievements  were  also  published.  JU  representatives  also  attended  international 
conferences and specific events were held to publicise calls. The tables at Annex and the Staff 
Working Paper list the main communication activities of each JU.  

For the first time, the five JTI JUs jointly organised a one-week event, ‘Innovation in action’, 
in  the  European  Parliament  building  in  Brussels  in  October  2011.  The  event  was  hosted  by 
Maria  de  Graça  Carvalho,  MEP.  A  joint  exhibition  ran  for  the  week  and  each  Joint 
Technology Initiative had its own conference and ran sessions on particular topics. The press 
attended a joint press conference and covered the event. The Executive Directors of all five 
JUs  presented  their  organisations’  key  successes  and  the  Commission  Director-General  and 
Deputy Director-General took part in the discussions. 

JTI  research  activities  were  fully  under  way  and  2011  saw  the  first  success  stories.  Some 
projects won awards for being particularly innovative and others were recognised as excellent 
for their research achievements (see ‘success stories’ in the tables at Annex). 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
On  the  administrative  front,  the  five  JUs  moved  successfully  in  January  2011  from  a 
Commission building to dedicated premises in the heart of Brussels. By the end of the year, 
they had made progress in staff recruitment: both FCH and ENIAC reached full capacity; IMI, 
Clean  Sky  and  ARTEMIS  were  closed  to  fully  staffed,  however  IMI  had  three  vacant 
temporary  posts  and  one  contract  post  above  the  authorised  level.  Recruitment  to  the  Clean 
Sky JU was in line with the Governing Board’s decision, but there was a Contract Agent post 
vacant  and  an  urgent  need  for  additional  staff  to  handle  the  workload  that  could  not  be 
covered by the current team so extra, temporary staff were hired. ARTEMIS had two vacant 
contract agent posts. 

The  JUs  complied  with  planning  and  reporting  requirements,  both  their  governing  and 
advisory  bodies  met  on  a  regular  basis,  and  their  Governing  Boards  approved  strategic 
documents  such  as  the  2010  final  accounts  and  draft  budgets.  New  chairs  of  the  Governing 
Boards of Clean Sky and FCH were elected in 2011. 

3.4. 

Operational progress  

JUs aim to coordinate resources and funding from industry and public bodies so as to achieve 
synergies  and  help  build  Europe’s  future  growth,  competitiveness  and  sustainable 
development.  In  2011,  the  five  JUs  launched  further  calls  for  proposals  in  line  with  their 
strategic  research  agendas  and  continued  to  evaluate  and  negotiate  grants  arising  from 
previous  calls.  Since  they  differ  in  terms  of  the  number  of  calls,  topics,  evaluation  stages, 
sector and governance, the operational progress achieved during 2011 in call implementation 
is reported in separate sections below.  

4. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE CLEAN SKY JU  

For  the  period  2008–2013,  Clean  Sky  was  allocated  a  total  budget  of  € 1.6  billion:  a 
maximum € 800 million from the European Comm ission (in cash), to be matched by industry 
contributions (in kind) worth at least € 800 m illion. Three main objectives were set for Clean 
Sky:  (i)  to  accelerate  environmental  improvements  in  Air  Transportation  System  (ATS) 
through  the  introduction  of  advanced  technologies  and  full  scale  demonstrators,  (ii)  to 
improve on the overall ATS impact on the environment (reducing noise, emissions, and fuel 
consumption), and (iii) to consolidate the European aeronautics industry around a project of 
common interest. 

Clean  Sky’s  performance  needs  to  be  judged  in  the  light  of  its  specific  characteristics,  in 
particular  the  considerable  industry  involvement  in  the  JU  at  various  levels,  from  strategic 
management  to  the  definition  and  description  of  call  topics  and  direct  participation  in  the 
evaluation  of  projects.  Unlike  the  other  JUs,  Clean  Sky  works  mainly  via  grants  to  named 
beneficiaries  rather  than  calls  for  proposals.  In  fact,  its  main  achievements  result  from  the 
work of its members, organised in six different technical areas called Integrated Technology 
Demonstrators (ITD), supported by a Technology Evaluator who continuously monitors and 
assesses  the  result.  There  is  effective  and  organised  coordination  with  other  organisations, 
particularly the Single European Sky Air Traffic Management Research (SESAR) JU.  

 600 million, or 75 %) is distributed to these members or ‘named 
Much of the overall budget (€
beneficiaries’; the remaining €
 200 million is allocated to calls for proposals. These calls are 
launched  on  a  regular  but  one-off  basis  when  ITD  members  express  a  need  for  additional 
specific research activities to complement their work. Consequently, the Clean Sky calls for 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
proposals  are  targeted  calls,  cover  various  topics  (23  to  58  during  2011)  and  are  of  short 
duration (averaging six months to one year). 

In 2011 Clean Sky completed the evaluation of call 7 and published three calls for proposals: 
calls 8, 9 and 10. It managed 159 topics in total, resulting in a total of 325 partners from 22 
countries selected after call 10. The table below gives an overview of the calls launched and 
evaluated by Clean Sky in 2011, including proposals submitted and evaluated. 

Proposals 

Evaluation results 

Call indicative 

No of 
topics 

Submitted  

Eligible 

%  
eligible 

Above 
the 
threshold

Selected for 
funding 

Success
rate 
(%) 

Indicative 
budget 
 [max. 
funding] (€m) 

Outcome of 
the call (€m)  

7 

8 

9 

SPI-JTI-CS-2010-
05 

SPI-JTI-CS-2011-
01 

SPI-JTI-CS-2011-
02 

10  SPI-JTI-CS-2011-

03 

38 

58 

23 

40 

71 

127 

62 

62 

67 

94.37 %

119 

93.70 %

59 

95.16 %

60 

96.77 %

45 

84 

32 

35 

29 

49 

16 

24 

64 % 

58 % 

50 % 

68 % 

23.0 

31.9 

12.7 

19.5 

14.6 

22.5 

6.1 

9.4 

TOTAL 

159 

322 

305 

95 % 

196 

118 

60 % 

87.1 

52.6 

In  comparison  with  the  other  JUs,  overall  participation  in  the  calls  is  high  and  so  is  the 
number  of  projects  selected  for  funding.  The  participants  are  evenly  distributed  between 
research organisations, industry, universities and SMEs. However, Clean Sky appeared to be 
less attractive to public bodies and regulatory agencies in 2011. SMEs accounted for a very 
high number of participants in the projects funded (37 %); over the period 2008–2011, SMEs 
accounted for 38% of the EU’s Clean Sky funding6. 

Based on the data available for the funded projects, calls 7 to 10 attracted participants from 23 
countries.  The  countries  best  represented  were  the  United  Kingdom,  Germany,  Spain,  Italy 
and  France,  which  have  an  industrial  tradition  in  aeronautics.  Clean  Sky  attracted  the  most 
participants  from  the  EU-12  countries  of  any  JU.  Of  the  ‘associated’  countries,  Switzerland 
led  with  six  coordinators,  while  the  main  international  partners  were  China  and  Russia;  the 
US did not participate. 

The  Technology  Evaluator  covered  four  main  research  work  packages,  which  all  had 
activities  and  deliverables  in  2011.  Overall,  carrying  out  the  2011  plan  was  a  significant 
challenge.  Despite  some  difficulties,  the  Technology  Evaluator  managed  to  put  in  place 
reinforced  planning  and  control  mechanisms  for  2012.  The  first  assessment  performed,  also 
served  to  ‘demonstrate’  the  full  process  and  proved  to  be  encouraging.  The  quality  and 
timeliness of deliverables should improve significantly in 2012 and will be closely monitored 
by the JU as a top priority. 

For  more  information,  including  success  stories,  see  ‘Clean  Sky  JU:  main  achievements  in 
2011 at a glance’, in the Annex. 

6 

The  38%  share  of  the  SMEs  participation  concerns  only  their  participation  in  the  calls  for  proposals. 
Only € 200 million of EU funding for Clean Sky is dedicated for calls for proposals while € 600 million 
is distributed to the 'named beneficiaries'.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
5. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE INNOVATIVE MEDECINES INITIATIVE JU 

For the period 2008–2013, the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) JU was allocated a total 
budget  of  € 2  billion.  The  European  Commissi on  contributes  maximum  € 1  billion  from  its 
Seventh  Framework  Programme  budget,  to  be  matched  by  in-kind  contributions  (consisting 
mostly of research activities) worth at least another € 1 billion from member companies of the 
European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). This makes the 
IMI Europe’s largest public-private partnership overall, as well as the largest pharmaceutical-
related PPP. 

The  IMI’s  main  objectives  are:  (i)  to  build  a  more  collaborative  environment  for 
pharmaceutical R&D in Europe; (ii) to speed up the development of more effective and safer 
medicines  for  patients  and  (iii)  to  increase  the  competitiveness  of  the  EU  pharmaceutical 
sector.  The  main  challenges  are:  (i)  industrial:  insufficient  R&D  investment;  (ii)  scientific: 
technological complexity, and (iii) European: research is fragmented in Europe.  

Industrial  partners  are  heavily  involved  in  IMI;  in  particular,  EFPIA  companies  participate 
much  more  in  IMI  projects  than  in  FP7  Health Projects. Another feature  of IMI is the two-
stage  process  for  calls  for  proposals:  applicants  send  Expressions  of  Interest  (EoIs)  in  stage 
one, then in stage two the best ranked participants and the EFPIA consortium are invited to 
form a full project consortium and draft a Full Project Proposal (FPP). 

In 2011, IMI completed the evaluation of call 3 and published a fourth call for proposals. The 
table below presents a general overview of the calls launched and evaluated in 2011, with data 
on the submitted EoIs and evaluated FFPs. 

Call 
indicative 

2010-03 

2011-04 

TOTAL 

No of 
topics 

7 

7 

14 

Submitted 
EoIs 

Eligible 
EoIs 

% of 
retained  

EoIs 
above the 
threshold 

FPPs selected 
for funding 

Success rate (selected 
FPPs/ submitted EoIs) 

32 

86 

118 

30 

80 

93.75 % 

93.02 % 

110 

93.4 % 

16 

30 

46 

7 

7 

14 

21.88 % 

8.14 % 

11,86 % 

Calls 3 and 47 attracted wide interest and a high number of applicants: 1377. But because of 
the restricted number of topics, only 20 % (266) of the initial applicants were finally included 
in the projects selected for funding together with industry participants — about 50 teams from 
EFPIA companies joined the consortia. The total number of participants in the calls in 2011 is 
316, resulting in an average success rate of 23 %. 

The  participants'  typology  of  IMI  is  very  specific.  Industry  is  well  represented  (by  EFPIA 
companies and SMEs) and there is also very high participation from universities. At the first 
stage,  a  good  number  of  EoIs  were  submitted  by  SMEs,  followed  by  other  participants  and 
patients’  organisations.  But  academia  accounted  for  most  of  the  participants  in  the  projects 
eventually  funded  (208)  followed  by  the  EFPIA  (53)  and  SMEs  (47),  with  the  latter 
representing 17.7 % of total participation. SMEs received 13.56 % of the EU funding over the 
period from 2008 to 2011. 

7 

EFPIA  companies  are  not  included  at  the  first  stage  of  the  process  (EoIs),  they  are  only  taken  into 
account when it comes to FPPs and proposals selected for funding. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Regarding the geographical distribution of the applicants, the available figures relate to Call 3. 
Participants  in  the  winning  projects  (123,  excluding  EFPIA  companies)  came  from  19 
countries, mostly the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, France and Sweden. The 
Czech  Republic  and  Hungary  were  the  only  EU-12  countries  (recent  EU  members) 
represented, with a single participant each. Switzerland led the ‘associated’ countries, with six 
participants,  followed  by  Israel  and  Iceland.  As  for  international  participation,  the  US  had 
three  participants  (as  many  as  Spain).  For  call  4,  IMI  recorded  143  participations  in  the 
proposals selected for funding, but the geographical distribution is unknown yet. 

For more information including success stories, see ‘IMI JU: main achievements in 2011at a 
glance’, in the Annex. 

6. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE FUEL CELLS AND HYDROGEN JU  

For the period 2008–2013, the Commission allocated the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen (FCH) JU 
a budget of €
 470 million. This amount is expected to be matched by cash contribution for the 
running  costs  and  by  in-kind  contributions  for  the  operational  costs  from  the  legal  entities 
participating  in  its  activities.  FCH  is  therefore  expected  to  have  a  total  budget  of  €
 940 
million. 

FCH’s main objectives are: (i) to accelerate the development and deployment of fuel cell and 
hydrogen technologies; (ii) to provide the technology base to start marketing them within the 
timeframe  2015  to  2020,  reducing  the  ‘time  to  market’,  and  (iii)  to  place  Europe  at  the 
forefront of these technologies worldwide. 

FCH  uses  two  types  of  funding  schemes  to  further  a  wide  spectrum  of  RTD  activities: 
collaborative  projects  (for  basic  research  and  demonstration)  and  coordination  and  support 
actions (for networking activities, including pre-normative research). Another feature of FCH 
is its cross-cutting activity: to complement the four scientific application areas it aims to raise 
awareness, educate the public and support the market. Submission and evaluation are carried 
out by means of a simple single-stage process. 

FCH  launched  one  call  in  2011  (FCH-JU-2011-1  —  see  table  below).  The  table  below 
presents data on the submitted and evaluated proposals to this call. 

Call 

indicative  No 

topics 

of 

Submitted 
proposals 

Eligible 
proposals 

2011-01 

36 

82 

81 

% of 
retained 

98.78 % 

Above the 
threshold 

Selected for 
funding 

Success rate 

53 

30 

36.59 % 

FCH  attracted  a  wide  range  of  participants  of  all  types,  including  public  authorities  (e.g. 
national/regional  bodies,  energy  agencies)  and  NGOs.  This  could  be  because  of  their 
particular interest in the coordination and support actions. The participants were also evenly 
distributed between research organisations and industry. Of the 667 applicants responding to 
the call, 225 had their projects funded. The projects selected for funding involved 73 SMEs, 
representing 25.6 % of total participation. Over the period 2008 to 2011, SMEs accounted for 
22.15 % of EU funding in FCH. 

A  total  of  26  countries  were  represented  in  the  call,  led  by  Germany,  the  United  Kingdom, 
France,  Italy  and  Belgium.  EU-12  countries  were  well  represented,  with  10  participations. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Switzerland and Norway led the list of ‘associated’ countries (with seven coordinators each) 
followed by Iceland and Turkey with one participant each. The international partners included 
participants from the US, the Republic of Korea, China, Canada and Serbia. 

In terms of administrative progress, FCH overcame some of the limits on in-kind contribution 
when  Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  1183/2011  was  adopted  on  14  November  2011. 
Recognising the membership of the N.ERGHY Research Grouping, this amendment allowed 
non-industry  participants  such  as  the  N.ERGHY  Research  Grouping  to  make  in-kind 
contributions counting as matching  funding. This amendment was also expected to improve 
funding levels. 

For more information, including success stories, see ‘FCH JU: main achievements in 2011 at 
a glance’, in the Annex. 

7. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE ARTEMIS JU IN 2011 

For the period 2008–2013, the Commission allocated a maximum budget of € 420 million to 
the  Embedded  Computing  Systems  (ARTEMIS)  JU,  which  was  boosted  by  ARTEMIS 
Member State funding of at least 1.8 times the EU contribution (€ 756 million). A matching 
contribution  in  kind  at  least  equivalent  to  the  public  authorities’  total  is  expected  from 
industry. 

On 5 July 2011, ARTEMIS signed an additional Administrative Agreement with the Brussels 
Capital  Region  of  Belgium.  An  Administrative  Agreement  with  Poland  was  signed  in 
December  2011,  making  it  the  23rd  ARTEMIS  Member  State,  with  the  intention  of 
committing a budget to the 2012 call. 

The main objectives of ARTEMIS are to tackle the research and structural challenges faced 
by industry in embedded systems and to help the European industry consolidate and reinforce 
its  world  leadership  in  embedded  computing  technologies.  The  participation  of  Member 
States in funding and governance alongside the EU and industry is a major feature of the JU. 
The submission and evaluation procedure is two-stage: applicants first send a project outline 
(PO), then a full project proposal (FPP). 

In 2011, 10 grant agreements relating to the 2010 call 3 were signed and call 4 was launched. 
The  table  below  gives  an  overview  of  the  POs  and  FFPs  submitted  in  response  to  call  4, 
together with the results of the evaluation. 

Call 
indicative 

Submitted 
project 
outlines 
(POs) 

Submitted 
proposals 
(FPPs) 

Eligible 
proposals 

2011-1 

41 

27 

27 

% of 
retained 

100 % 

Above the 
threshold 

Selected for 
funding 

Success rate 

16 

9 

22 % 

540 applicants reached the FPP stage of the 2011 call for proposals and 206 were involved in 
the  projects  funded  (an  average  of  23  participants  per  project).  ARTEMIS  seeks  to  foster 
collaboration between all stakeholders — industry, including SMEs, national and/or regional 
authorities,  and  academic  and  research  centres  —  pulling  together  and  focusing  research 
efforts. There was a good balance in the types of participants in 2011, with 71 from research 
organisations and academia, 73 industrial partners and 62 SMEs. The scientific and research 
community  is  well  represented  and  coordinated.  SMEs  accounted  for  37.9 %  of  total 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
participations  in  2011,  and  obtained  19.18 %  of  EU  funding  to  ARTEMIS  over  the  period 
2008 to 2011. 

The projects funded involved 17 countries, led by Spain, Italy, Germany, Finland, France and 
Austria. The EU-12 countries were also represented, by Czech Republic, Latvia and Estonia. 
Only one associated country was involved in the projects selected for funding: Norway, but 
with a good number of participants (6). The US was the sole international partner, with one 
participant. 

For  more  information  see  ‘ARTEMIS  JU:  main  achievements  in  2011  at  a  glance’,  in  the 
Annex. 

8. 

PROGRESS ACHIEVED BY THE ENIAC JU  

For the period 2008–2013, the Commission allocated a maximum budget of € 450 million to 
Nanoelectronics (ENIAC), which was boosted by ENIAC Member State funding of at least of 
1.8  times  the  EU  contribution  (€ 810  million).  A  matching  contribution  in  kind  at  least 
equivalent to the public authorities’ total is expected from industry. 

The  main  objectives  of  ENIAC  are:  (i)  to  tackle  research  and  innovation  in  nanoelectronics 
technologies and their integration in smart systems; (ii) to help European industry consolidate 
and reinforce its position in nanoelectronics technologies and systems and (iii) to contribute to 
further  incorporation  and  miniaturisation  of  devices,  and  increase  their  functionalities  while 
delivering new materials, equipment and processes. As with ARTEMIS, the participation of 
Member States in funding and governance alongside the EU and industry is a major feature of 
ENIAC. The submission and evaluation process is similarly two-stage (PO, then FPP). 

In 2011 a decline in commitments by ENIAC Member States was reversed and this increase 
in commitments is expected to continue in 2012. However, it was observed that the 1.8 ratio 
between  the  ENIAC  JU  and  the  Member  States’  grants  to  the  projects  would  likely  not  be 
achieved  at  the  life  end  of  the  JU.  As  a  consequence,  the  Public  Authority  Board  took  a 
decision to reduce ENIAC JU's participation from 16.7 % to 15 % of total eligible costs and up 
to  52 %  of  the  ENIAC  Member  States’  contributions  to  the  calls  for  proposals.  This  should 
result  in  a  ratio  close  to  1.8,  provided  that  (i)  the  ENIAC  JU  uses  the  maximum  EU 
contribution provided for in the Council Regulation and (ii) the ENIAC Member States fund 
their participants at funding rates similar to those in the past. 

In 2011 ENIAC launched two calls for proposals, call 4 and call 5 (the latter with a one-stage 
procedure  because  of  a  tight  deadline).  The  table  below  gives  an  overview  of  the  two  calls 
launched and evaluated in 2011. 

Call 
indicative 

2011-1 

2011-2 

TOTAL 

Submitted 
project 
outlines 
(POs) 

20 

NA 

20 

Submitted 
proposals 
(FPPs) 

9 

8 

17 

Eligible 
proposals 

% of 
retained 

Above the 
threshold 

Selected for 
funding 

9 

7 

16 

100 % 

87.50 % 

93.75 % 

7 

6 

13 

6 

6 

12 

Success rate 
% (FPP 
level) 

66.7 % 

75.0 % 

70.85 % 

Of the 286 applicants that sent Full Project Proposals (FPP) for the 2011 ENIAC calls, 195 
were selected for funding, a good success rate. The balance of partners is very specific to the 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
 
sector: research organisations (50), industry (71) and SMEs (74) are quite evenly represented 
while public bodies and academia are absent. SMEs accounted for 37.9 % of all participations 
from 2008 to 2011 they accounted for 13.30 % of EU funding. 

Participants in the calls came from 19 countries, with the Netherlands in the lead, followed by 
Italy, France, Germany and Austria. EU-12 countries also participated, mostly represented by 
the  Czech  Republic,  Poland  and  Slovakia.  There  was  good  participation  from  ‘associated’ 
countries, led by Israel, with 5 participants, Norway (3) and Switzerland (1). However, there 
were no international partners. 

Towards the end of 2011 the ENIAC JU launched a call for Expressions of Interest in setting 
up pilot lines. This call aims to prepare the JU to be a preferred instrument for implementing 
the KET policy on improving Europe’s position in six ‘key enabling technologies’ including 
nanoelectronics. The pilot lines will allow innovation at higher technology-readiness levels (4 
to 8) providing a bridge to Horizon 2020. 

For more information, including success stories, see ‘The ENIAC JU: main achievements in 
2011 at a glance’, in the Annex. 

9. 

GENERAL PROGRESS ACHIEVED IN 2011  

9.1. 

Stakeholder participation 

Thanks to the experience gained with setting up the JUs, it is now possible to start providing 
data on progress achieved in terms of participation. 

Clean Sky 
IMI 
FCH 
Artemis 
Eniac 
Total 

Participations in proposals 
submitted (2011) 
600 
1377 
667 
540 
286 
3470 

Participations in projects selected for 
funding (2011) 
238 
319 
285 
206 
195 
1243 

In 2011, JUs registered 3470 participations in submitted proposals while the participations in 
funded projects equalled 1243. The overall success rate of 35.8 % is very promising and can 
be  regarded  as  positive  given  that  JUs  are  conducting  highly  specific,  industry-driven 
research. 

The JUs have made efforts to widen participation, for example by improving communication 
with potential applicants to the open calls for proposal. Tailored Info Days have been held and 
JU participation in seminars, events and major technological fairs and exhibitions has grown. 
Progress has also been made in increasing the public visibility of JTIs. Almost all JTIs’ web 
pages were revamped to present better and more user-friendly information. 

This  action  has  helped  make  the  JTIs  JUs  initiatives  more  accessible  to  the  research  and 
scientific communities. As a result, for example, IMI received twice as many expressions of 
interest in response to its second call as it had in response to its first. 

The types of stakeholders involved in the research projects vary according to the JU: 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Participation  in  FCH  projects  funded  is  diverse,  with  all  stakeholders  being 
represented  in  funded  projects:  77  research  organisations,  49  universities,  76  large 
industries, 73 SMEs, 7 others and 3 public bodies among its 285 participants. 

IMI  has  attracted  some  50  participations  from  EFPIA  companies  (large  industry), 
208 universities, 47 SMEs, 6 patients’ organisations and 5 others. 

Clean Sky, ENIAC and ARTEMIS have no public bodies or ‘others’ participating in 
their funded projects.  

Industry accounts for 73 and 71 participations in ARTEMIS and ENIAC respectively 
and 53 in Clean Sky.  

Universities  account for 54  participations in Clean  Sky, whilst they are included in 
research organisations in ARTEMIS.  

Research  organisations  account  for  43  participation  in  Clean  Sky  and  71  and  50 
respectively in ARTEMIS and ENIAC.  

After  two  years  of  full  activities,  stakeholder  participation  seems  well  balanced  overall, 
though there still is room for improvement in less well-represented categories. 

When  looking  at  participation  and  representativeness  figures,  it  is  well  to  remember  that 
targeted results are expected in each technological sector. 

9.2. 

The Innovation dimension and SME involvement 

The  current  five  JUs  can  already  be  considered  an  innovative  model  of  implementing 
research. The partnership between public and private sectors is a significant step forward in 
transferring  research  results  to  the  market.  The  JTIs  JUs  set  their  own  research  agendas  in 
close  cooperation  with  industry,  with  the  aim  of  turning  results  into  applications  in  the 
shortest possible time. This process of accelerating the use of research results will be pushed 
further under Horizon 2020, in particular under the ‘Industrial Leadership’ objective. 

That  being  said,  we  can  already  highlight  elements  which  allow  a  first  appreciation  of  the 
innovation  achieved  by  the  five  JUs  in  2011,  even  if  this  report  does  not  aim  to  present  a 
detailed analysis of this aspect. 

• 

• 

• 

The concept of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) has been introduced in the Clean 
Sky JU and projects submitted in reply to the open calls are also evaluated in terms 
of the level of maturity of the technology. The TRL is used to evaluate and compare 
the  different  stages  of  development  of  a  given  technology;  the  maximum  level  6 
refers to research projects which have reached the stage before product development. 

In  ARTEMIS,  an  Index  of  maturity  and  an  Index  of  SME  engagement  in  the 
proposals  are  used  to  facilitate  the  evaluation  of  those  projects  which  can  best 
contribute to developing innovation from research. 

A  number  of  prototyping  and  demonstration  activities  were  present  in  the  Annual 
Implementation Plans for the JTIs. For Clean Sky, in 2011, there were 15 research 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
topics open to demonstrators and 1 on prototyping. For FCH, there were 7 topics for 
demonstrators and one for a proof of concept focused on fuel cell systems. 

• 

In  2011,  ENIAC  introduced  the  ‘ENIAC  Innovation  Award’  to  recognise  projects 
approaching  completion  or  having  recently  been  completed  that  produced  the  most 
impactful innovation. The ‘E3Car’ project, with 28 demonstrators and a total budget 
of €

 180 million, was the first winner. 

• 

Two JUs also won Innovation Awards: 

– 

– 

Clean  Sky  was  given  an  award  at  the  ‘Inter  Airport  Europe’  event  in 
Munich  for  the  ‘TaxiBot’  project,  for  having  found  an  innovative 
solution applicable to towbarless aircraft tractors for taxiing in and out at 
airports that reduces environmental impact. 

One  of  the  smaller  companies  active  in  FCH  received  the  EU  prize  for 
women  innovators  at  the  2011  Innovation  Convention.  An  Italian 
company  with  40  employees  was  the  first  to  develop  a  self-recharging 
hydrogen  fuel  cell  system  for  back-up  power,  a  cleaner,  renewable 
alternative to lead-acid batteries and diesel generators. 

In  this  way,  JUs  achieved  further  progress  in  knowledge  and  scientific  quality  in  2011, 
with projects having potential impacts on the industry and the research environment. 

In aeronautics, a new system was developed to reduce manufacturing and maintenance costs: 
the Breakthrough Laminar Aircraft Demonstrator in Europe (BLADE) and analyses of airline 
economics including the requirements of new environmental regulations are ongoing: this is 
the  Contribution  of  Airlines  for  the  Reduction  of  Industry  Nuisances  and  Gases  (CARING) 
project. 

In  fostering  the  development  of  better  and  safer  medicines  for  patients,  the  NEWMEDS 
database is the world largest repository of antipsychotic clinical trial data, comprising data on 
23 401 patients from the five leading pharmaceutical companies in the area. It is important to 
emphasise  that,  for  the  first  time,  competing  companies  have  a  common  will  to  open  and 
share  the  results  of  their  clinical  trials.  This  is  essential  support  for  better  targeted  and 
personalised health care. 

In the transport sector, the Clean Hydrogen In European Cities Project (CHIC) is introducing 
environmentally-friendly  city  buses  in  European  cities  to  reduce  the  impact  of  buses  on  the 
environment, and promotes them with the aim of shortening the ‘time to market’. The E3Car 
project, funded to manage the power train of electrical vehicles improved power conversion 
and  distribution  and  increased  energy  efficiency,  by  10 %  and  35 %  respectively,  offering  a 
competitive environment of 28 demonstrators. 

The JUs encouraged SME participation, with good results in 2011: about 28 % of successful 
participants  were  SMEs.  Of  the  five  JTIs,  ENIAC  proved  most  attractive  to  SMEs,  which 
accounted  for  37.9 %  of  total  participation  in  the  JU,  followed  by  Clean  Sky  (37 %)8; 

8 

The  37%  share  of  the  SMEs  participation  concerns  only  their  participation  in  the  calls  for  proposals. 
Only € 200 million of EU funding for Clean Sky is dedicated for calls for proposals while € 600 million 
is distributed to the 'named beneficiaries'.  

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ARTEMIS (31 %); FCH (25.6 %) and IMI (17.7 %)9. The average rate of EU funding which 
went to SMEs for all JTIs JUs in the period 2008-2011 was slightly over 21 %, which exceeds 
the  general  FP7  objective  of  15 %.  The  table  below  presents  a  detailed  overview  of  SME 
participation in the five JUs, both in proposals submitted and in projects selected for funding 
(2011). 

Clean Sky 
IMI 
FCH 
ARTEMIS 
ENIAC 
Total 

Participations in submitted 
proposals 
239 
263 
174 
182 
109 
967 

Participations in projects selected 
for funding 
88 
47 
73 
62 
74 
344 

The number of SMEs participating strongly suggests that there is a good balance of research 
activities tailored to SMEs, in which their contributions are essential to the achievements of 
more general research and innovation objectives. 

With  the  progress  achieved  in  2011,  JTIs  JUs  are  on  the  way  to  reaching  their  innovation 
potential  and  to  contributing  to  meeting  the  future  challenges  set  under  the  Horizon  2020 
programme. 

9.3. 

Participation in terms of geographical location 

The five JUs involve an average of 20 Member States in the implementation of the SRAs. 
The  most  diverse  is  FCH,  which  has  a  number  of  international  partners.  The  top  players 
belong  to  Member  States  that  have  an  advanced  industrial  environment  surrounded  by 
dynamic systems of SMEs, research centres and universities. 

Clean Sky 
IMI 
FCH 
ARTEMIS 
ENIAC 

No of countries participating in 
projects selected for funding 
23 
15 
26 
17 
19 

Top players10 

UK, DE, ES, IT FR 
UK, DE, NL, FR, SE 
DE, UK, FR, IT, BE 
ES, IT, DE, FI, FR & AT 
NL, IT, FR, DE, BE 

We also note that all but one of the EU-12 countries have participated. 

• 

9 
10 

Overall,  the  EU-12  accounts  for  roughly  15 %  of  the  total  participation  in  funded 
projects.  Clean  Sky  leads  with  about  10 %,  whereas  EU-12  participation  in  IMI 
projects  is  negligible.  The  graph  below  shows  EU-12  participation  by  JTI  in  2011 
(funded projects only). 

The respective percentage rates for the participation of SMEs in each JTI relate to the year 2011. 
Best performing countries ranked in terms of number of participations in the funded projects. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
• 

• 

The best represented EU-12 Member State is Poland with 18 participations in funded 
projects  (6  in  FCH  and  ENIAC  altogether,  12  in  Clean  Sky),  and  5  projects 
coordinated  by  Polish  organisations.  The  Czech  Republic  follows  with  16 
participations in funded projects and positions in all JTIs, led by ARTEMIS with 7 
Czech  participations.  Romania  accounts  for  6  participations  and  Hungary  3.  By 
contrast, Lithuania is not involved in any selected projects. 

Clean  Sky  organised  a  round  table  on  aeronautical  research  in  Central  and  Eastern 
Europe  in  2011,  to  boost  the  participation  of  less  active  areas.  This  is  considered 
good practice, and the Commission wants to see this emulated by the other JTIs in 
future. In 2012, the Commission will hold further discussions with the JUs on how to 
substantially increase EU-12 participation. 

JTI  research  activities  also  proved  attractive  to  countries  associated  with  the  FP7,  which 
accounted for roughly 15 % of participations. The most active Associated Country, in 2011, 
was  Switzerland,  followed  by  Norway  and  Israel.  FCH  attracted  the  highest  number  of 
participants  from  associated  countries,  followed  by  Clean  Sky  and  IMI.  Assessments  of 
associated country involvement in ARTEMIS and ENIAC should also take into account their 
tripartite model of funding. 

Country 

Switzerland 

IMI 
6 

FCH 
7 

Norway 

Iceland 

Israel 

Turkey 

Serbia 

Total 

2 

2 

10 

7 

1 

1 

1 
17 

CS 
6 

1 

2 

1 

ARTEMIS 

ENIAC 
1 

6 

Total 
20 

17 

3 

9 

2 

1 
52 

3 

5 

9 

10 

6 

9.4. 

The International dimension 

A  number  of  international  partners  have  been  involved  in  JTI  activities,  accounting  for 
roughly 3 % of participations in projects funded in 2011. The range of experience gained with 
international partners varies greatly from one technological sector to another. It also depends 
on the strategies and synergies that JTIs pursue in research, innovation or regulatory fields.  

As shown in the table below, the United States showed interest in almost all JTIs and had the 
greatest participation in funded projects overall. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
 
Country 

IMI 

FCH 

CS 

ARTEMIS 

ENIAC 

Total 

US 

Russia 

China 

Korea 

Canada 

Total 

3 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

2 

1 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

10 

In order to compete in the global arena, industry needs not only to reinforce cooperation and 
decrease fragmentation in Europe, but to establish synergies elsewhere, in particular with key 
international players. The international dimension of JTIs initiatives is thus an element which 
is going to be further developed. The Commission is currently discussing with the JUs how to 
reach out to international partners to meet the particular needs of the sectors concerned. 

FCH  has  already  revised  its  Multi-Annual  Implementation  Plan  to  make  it  more  ambitious 
and competitive in comparison with the worldwide efforts in the technological domain. The 
updated ARTEMIS SRA now clearly shows what is needed in Europe in the next decade from 
all players in R&D and innovation to make Europe a leader in Embedded Systems. 

9.5. 

Grant portfolio  

The Grant Agreements (GAs) portfolio varies from one JU to another, along with the types of 
projects,  the  size  of  consortia  and  the  budget  allocated.  JUs  may  not  only  develop 
collaborative  research  but  also  support  networking  activities  (e.g.  FCH)  with  Coordination 
and Support Actions, where consortium size is naturally smaller and its composition different. 

Grants under 
negotiation 
in 2011 
24 
2 
0 
9 
0 
35 

Grants signed 
in 2011 

80 
13 
26 
10 
22 
151 

Grants for which 
activities have 
ended 
7 
0 
5 
3 
0 
15 

Clean Sky 
IMI 
FCH 
ARTEMIS 
ENIAC 
Total 

In the first three years of activity, the portfolios of Grant Agreements signed by JUs differed 
in size, number of partners and budget allocated. 

• 

Clean Sky’s GAs are the most distinctive. The number of projects funded and GAs 
signed is bigger, but with fewer partners in each and relatively small budgets. Clean 
Sky calls allow single-partner projects, particularly if the research topic is so specific 
that only one organisation (or few competing in selection and evaluation) fits the call 
requirements. There are on average two partners in Clean Sky GAs, with an average 
allocated  budget  of  €  515,000.  So  while  the  number  of  GAs  to  be  signed  calls  for 
considerable management efforts, coordination in the consortia requires less effort. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
• 

• 

IMI  and  FCH  attract  similar  types  of  consortia:  there  are  fewer  projects  (and  GAs 
signed) but they are bigger in terms of both the budget allocated and the number of 
partners. The average number of partners in an IMI project is 26, taking EFPIA and 
non-EFPIA organisations together, and the average budget of GAs signed is roughly 
 10 million (IMI JU contributions only). For FCH, on average there are 9 partners 
per project with a budget of €

 3.8 million. 

ARTEMIS  and  ENIAC  average  23  (ARTEMIS)  and  22  (ENIAC)  partner 
 15.8 million (ARTEMIS) 
organisations in a consortium, with an average budget of €
and €

 23 million (ENIAC)11. 

10. 

CHALLENGES AND OUTLOOK  

The first interim evaluations of the Joint Undertakings were carried out as planned and reports 
were finalised in April 2011. The overall outlook for the JUs was considered to be good. The 
external experts’ recommendations included improving communication with citizens, setting 
key performance indicators and delegating more of the Governing Boards’ responsibilities for 
day-to-day  management  to  the  JUs’  Executive  Directors.  The  recommendations  should  be 
fully implemented before the second interim evaluation is conducted in 2013.  

In  2011,  the  JUs  considerably  improved  communication  activities  directed  at  the  general 
public. The projects’ visibility increased and the standard of their main communication tools 
(e.g. their web pages) rose. 

They also set up key performance indicators:  

• 

• 

• 

• 

IMI  set  key  performance  and  results  indicators  for  two  major  priorities:  SRA 
implementation  and  Programme  Office  performance.  The  average  Time  to  Grant 
(TtG) has fallen by over 90 days.  

Clean  Sky  implemented  most  of  the  recommendations  made  by  the  experts.  The 
performance  of  the  Integrated  Technology  Demonstrators  (ITDs)  was  subject  to 
annual review by independent experts.  

FCH introduced ‘Operational Indicators’ to monitor progress in RTD activities; these 
are set against results indicators using target and latest known results.  

ENIAC introduced a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) including the time taken from 
the  Public  Authorities  Board  funding  decision  to  the  first  payment  to  each 
beneficiary. 

Further  progress  will  be  assessed  in  the  second  interim  evaluation  and  the  2012  Annual 
Progress Report. 

As  the  JUs  are  now  fully  autonomous,  we  can  make  an  initial  assessment  of  their  benefits. 
The stable allocation of funds illustrates industry commitment. SMEs were attracted by the 

11 

Note that the ENIAC data refers to calls launched in the last three years, whereas the ARTEMIS data on 
average consortia size only applies to the 2011 call. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
€
                                                 
JTIs JUs' research topics, especially because of the stability and continuity of the research and 
innovation environments and the funding modalities. Overall, by the end of 2011, SMEs had 
received 21 % of the EU funding. As noted in Section 9.2, JTIs met the challenge of becoming 
a truly attractive way of implementing research for small and medium-size companies. SMEs 
can benefit from participation in specific working environments, from research topics that are 
clearly geared to the market and from the JUs as an instrument which better fits their needs'. 

Taking  a  broader  view,  overall  stakeholder  participation  is  well  balanced  and  all  parties 
have  been  involved  in  JTIs’  research  activities.  Budget  allocation  shows  that  research 
organisations  and  universities  accounted  for  45 %  of  EU  funding  on  average  and  industry 
34 %. Other organisations, such as NGOs, umbrella organisations and foundations, accounted 
for 2 % of the EU funding and SMEs for roughly 21%. 

In  2011  the  main  research  objectives  evolved  to  reflect  the  latest  progress  in  their  fields  of 
technology. The JTIs JUs strategic research and innovation agendas have been fed with 
ambitious objectives over a longer timeframe. 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

In aviation, Clean Sky updated its research objectives following the guidance given 
in  Flightpath  2050,  Europe’s  vision  for  Aviation  report,  produced  in  2011  by 
ACARE. 

The revision of the IMI’s strategic research agenda will change the types of projects 
funded: calls will focus on large-scale and game-changing projects. 

FCH  revised  its  Multi-Annual  Implementation  Plan  and  the  targets  for  the 
Application Areas were extended to 2020 (from 2015). 

ARTEMIS  revised  its  Strategic  Research  Agenda  to  take  better  account  of  the 
intrinsic  nature  of  embedded  systems  as  the  ‘neural  system’  of  society,  reflecting 
their pervasiveness in all modern products, infrastructure and services. 

ENIAC’s  Strategic  Research  Agenda  continues  to  be  pertinent  to  tackling  major 
societal  challenges,  which  very  much  depends  on  improving  integrated  circuit 
functionality and reducing power consumption. 

In general, and in comparison with previous versions, the JUs’ updated strategic research and 
innovation  agendas  have  largely  taken  into  consideration  the  strategy  for  research  and 
innovation put forward by the European Commission under ‘Horizon 2020’. Those links will 
ensure consistency and will make it easier to align EU actions with the overall objectives of 
increasing competitiveness in industry, excellence in science and growth and job creation. 

The JUs’ administrative consolidation continued, particularly development of their internal 
control  frameworks,  with  significant  advances  in  their  control  mechanisms.  The  Governing 
Boards  adopted  ex post  audit  strategies  and  considered  new  procedures  to  complete  and 
strengthen  their  Internal  Control  Systems.  All  Joint  Undertakings  improved  their  IT  and 
logistical functions.  

The results achieved by the five JUs so far confirm them as ambitious European initiatives 
with the potential to be recognised as models of public-private partnership. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
The Commission is now collecting contributions from the industrial partners with a view to 
further extending the JUs in the next Multi-Annual Financial Framework. Open consultations 
are also ongoing, in order to attract the widest possible response with a view to designing the 
future of JUs for the next period of financing. 

For the future, a number of challenges remain open: 

• 

Administrative burden 

The  JUs  are  relatively  small,  so  running  costs  are  relatively  high.  One  way  to  improve 
efficiency could be for the JUs and opt for a common administrative structure. The relatively 
small size of the JUs was considered as ‘risky element’ by experts involved in the first interim 
evaluation  of  ARTEMIS  and  ENIAC.  The  independent  experts  proposed,  amongst  the 
possible scenarios for JUs evolution both merging the two and setting up a joint structure for 
administrative tasks only.  

• 

Complementarities  and  coordination  with  other  EU  and  national  programmes  and 
commitment from industry and Member States in ARTEMIS and ENIAC 

It is time to seek better alignment of ARTEMIS and ENIAC research agendas with national 
programmes.  The  Commission  is  currently  discussing  possible  organisational  effects  with 
stakeholders,  taking  also  into  account  the  present  economic  situation.  Along  these  lines, 
common vision documents were produced with Eureka, the clusters CATRENE and ITEA2 in 
2010. This approach could prove useful and discussions are under way to provide a common 
framework for the JTIs while still keeping their specific approaches — top-down for the JTIs 
and  bottom-up  for  the  Eureka  clusters,  with  an  industry-led  strategy  for  both  instruments. 
Increased cooperation with Member States to strengthen synergies may be sought for all JTIs, 
in particular for the benefit of potential new entrants and for SMEs. 

Funding for ARTEMIS and ENIAC projects follows a unique tripartite model. Partners obtain 
much  of  their  funding  from  their  own  governments  or  regional  agencies  under  grant 
agreements. The JUs also provide funding directly to the partners worth up to about 16.7 % of 
their eligible costs. This funding model worked well in the first years of ARTEMIS, but with 
certain limitations — mainly caused by sharply lower commitments by Member States in the 
context of the economic and financial crisis. In 2011 for the first time the trend was upwards 
and this is expected to continue in 2012. 

To  summarise  the  experience  gained  in  the  first  year  of  autonomy  of  all  the  Joint 
Undertakings, in which the first successful results have been delivered12: 

(1) 

The  Joint  Undertakings  represent  an  innovative  model  for  conducting  research  in 
partnership  for  technologies  considered  strategic  for  Europe;  commitment  from  all 
partners  is  vital  to  achieve  the  expected  results  and  to  effectively  contribute  to  the 
Europe’s  competitiveness.  Irrespective  of  the  funding  mechanisms  put  in  place  by 
the  different  JUs,  the  past  two  years  have  shown  certain  difficulties  in  matching 
funds from industry and Member States. 

12 

See the Call Implementation section for the relevant JUs in the Annex. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

It is unquestionable that the JUs have gained speed and visibility and have started to 
be seen as relevant players in their fields of technology at global level. 

Additional flexibility in implementing structures (the JUs) should be granted to allow 
them to focus on research rather than on administrative tasks; if necessary, in order to 
improve their effectiveness, they could be organised differently to optimise the use of 
resources. 

The  JUs’  achievements  need  to  be  monitored  and  evaluated  against  a  set  of  KPIs, 
which  should  be  formulated  in  a  way  that  reflects  their  diversity  but  still  enables 
comparison. 

JUs should maintain and even increase their simplicity, openness and accessibility to 
all  potential  beneficiaries.  Particular  consideration  should  be  paid  to  new  entrants 
from less well-represented countries and to SMEs. 

Appropriate  international  strategies  should  be  defined  for  each  JTI  JU,  taking  into 
account their specific research areas, the potential benefits of cooperation in terms of 
research, innovation and regulation and, of course, the collateral risks. 

Based on the experience gained and looking to the future, JUs are on the way to consolidating 
their  potential  to  be  recognised  as  a  model  of  public-private  partnership  for  EU  research 
activities. They already made improvements in 2011 in line with the recommendations made 
in the first interim evaluation and further improvements are still expected. 

First successes in 2011, such as cutting manufacturing and maintenance costs in aeronautics, 
analysing  future  airline  economics,  and  opening  up  competing  companies  to  their  industrial 
partners (e.g. via a central database of results), demonstrate that JTI JUs are able not only to 
address  technical  challenges,  but  also  to  boost  the  industrial  and  research  environment.  A 
major step in the collection of project results is expected in 2012. 

Moreover, an initial analysis of the benefits of the PPPs is currently ongoing and the results 
will be reported in 2012. In assessing the extent of the JTI JUs’ impact on the implementation 
of research and innovation activities at EU level, the analysis will also refer to the criteria set 
in  the  Horizon  2020  programme  agreed  with  the  Member  States.  In  this  respect,  the  JUs’ 
experience  so  far  will  also  be  assessed  against  the  criteria  established  for  setting  up  future 
PPPs.  

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
11. 

ANNEX — PROGRESS ACHIEVED IN 2011 BY JTIS JUS AT A GLANCE 

1.1. 

Article Clean Sky (CS) JU: main achievements in 2011 at a glance 

AREA 

PROGRESS — ACHIEVEMENTS 

Strategic Research 
Agenda (SRA) 

The  targets  set  in  the  CS  SRA  were  re-assessed  as  well  as  the  actual  progress  and 
validity  assumptions.  The  results  were:  an  updated  Development  Plan  and  updated 
forecasts of achievable environmental benefits by the end of the programme. The First 
Internal Assessment has been published in 2012. 

Call 
implementation 

Number  of  calls  in  2011:  3  calls  launched  (2011-1;  2011-2;  2011-3).  The  last  call 
launched in 2010 (2010-5) was also implemented. 
Number of proposals submitted: 322 
Number of eligible proposals: 305 
Number of proposals funded: 118 
Global project portfolio: 298 (including 247 signed grant agreements) 

Success stories: 
-  BLADE  (Breakthrough  Laminar  Aircraft  Demonstrator  in  Europe),  selected  to  be 
exhibited  at  the  first  Innovation  Convention,  (Brussels,  5  and  6  December  2011), 
developed  a  monitoring  system  that  detects  damage  and  defects  in  newly  designed 
natural laminar flow wing in real time, reducing manufacturing and maintenance costs. 

- TaxiBot Dispatch Towing Vehicle (DTV) project won the 2011 Innovation Award 
at  Inter  Airport  Europe  in  Munich.  It  is  a  towbarless  aircraft  tractor  for  single  aisle 
aircraft  (e.g.  A320,  B737),  which  allows  the  aircraft  to  switch  off  engines  during 
taxiing. 

-  CARING  (Contribution  of  Airlines  for  the  Reduction  of  Industry  Nuisance  and 
Gases)  is  the  only  Clean  Sky  project  involving  airlines.  Running  from  early  2010  to 
December  2012,  it  aims  to  analyse  how  current  and  future  environmental  regulations 
could affect airline economics and how airlines can best adapt to regulatory changes. 

Participation, 
including SMEs 

In 2011: 
Total number of participants: 600 
Number of participants in funded projects: 238 
Number of SMEs in funded projects: 88 – 37 % of total participations 
Participants  by  category  in  funded  projects:  Large  Industry  (PRC):  53;  Higher  and 
Secondary Education (HSE): 54; Research Organisations (RCE):43  

From 2009 to 2011: 
Global geographic coverage of participation (in calls 1 to 10) broken down by country 
in funded projects: 23 countries involved. 

Top countries  Coordinators  Participants  Total participation 

UK 
DE 
ES 
IT 
FR 

52 
52 
31 
28 
39 

45 
34 
31 
33 
45 

97 
86 
62 
61 
84 

Participants  from  associated  countries  (Switzerland,  Israel,  Norway,  Turkey) 
coordinated  10  winning  projects.  One  Chinese  and  one  Russian  participant  were  also 
selected in 2010 and 2011 calls, both as coordinators. 

Communication 

CS participated in two major European technical conferences (Aerodays in Madrid and 
the  Paris  Air  Show).  Info  Days  for  potential  applicants  were  organised  in  Ankara, 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dublin, Lisbon, Toulouse, Vienna and Warsaw. 
CS took part in the first Innovation Convention, held in Brussels on 5 and 6 December. 
In Brussels, it hosted a joint event with the other JTIs at the European Parliament on 5 
and 6 October. 
The web page was revamped in April and the quarterly newsletter sent to about 3000 
recipients. Three press releases on crucial events were published and CS was quoted in 
14 in EU articles and publications. 
In  June  2011  CS  organised  a  round  table  on  Aeronautical  Research  in  Central  and 
Eastern Europe to boost the participation of less active areas in Europe. 
A focus on SMEs’ experiences with CS was issued (2 interviews) 

Governance 

The  Governing  Board  met  four  times  in  2011.  At  the  December  meeting  the  Chair 
(Charles Champion) and Vice-Chair (Catalin Nae) were elected. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
1.2. 

IMI JU: main achievements in 2011 at a glance 

AREA 
Strategic Research 
Agenda (SRA) 

PROGRESS — ACHIEVEMENTS 

SRA revision finalised, shifting the focus to large-scale, game-changing projects. 

Call 
implementation 

Participation, 
including SMEs 

Number of calls launched in 2011: 1. The last call launched in 2010 (call 3-2010) was 
also implemented. Both calls used a two-step submission and evaluation procedure. 
Number of proposals submitted (Expressions of Interest, first-stage proposal): 118 
Number of eligible proposals: 110 
Number of proposals funded: 14 
Global project portfolio: 30  

Success stories: 
NEWMEDS,  an  IMI  project  on  depression  and  schizophrenia,  created  new  databases 
allowing the collection and storage of large datasets, which led to the assembly of the 
largest known repository of antipsychotic clinical trial data, comprising data on 23 401 
patients from the five leading pharmaceutical companies in this area. 
For more information see: http://www.newmeds-europe.com/  

Total number of participants: 1377 altogether for calls 3 (438) and 4 (939) 
Participants in funded projects: 266 altogether for calls 3 (123) and 4 (143). 
53  EFPIA  companies  have  to  be  added  for  call  3.  For  call  4  the  number  of  EFPIA 
companies is not yet known. 
Number of SMEs in funded projects: 47 – 17.7 % of total participations in calls 3 and 4. 
Participants by category in funded projects, excluding industry: Patients organisations: 
6; Higher and Secondary Education (HSE): 208; Others (OTH): 5  

Participation  in  funded  projects  in  call  2010-3  broken  down  by  country  (data  not  yet 
available for 2011-4): 19 countries involved. 

Top countries  Total participations 

UK 
DE 
NL 
FR 
SE 

28 
21 
13 
11 
9 

In  addition  three  US  partners  were  involved  in  three  winning  consortia.  Israel  and 
Iceland had 2 participations each and Switzerland 6. 

IMI held 6 events in 4 countries each with 60 to 250 participants. In Brussels IMI took 
part in a joint JTI event hosted at the European Parliament on 5 and 6 October.  
Six press releases were issued and circulated to a target group of over 150 journalists. 
About  30  articles  were  published  in  media  and  journals,  6  of  them  for  a  specialised 
scientific public. The IMI newsletter reaches 1500 subscribers and the web page has up 
to 9000 visitors/month.  

Communication 

Governance 

The Governing Board met three times in 2011. 
In addition to decisions on running the JTI JU, the Board appointed the members of the 
Scientific Committee. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.3. 

FCH JU: main achievements in 2011 at a glance 

AREA 

PROGRESS — ACHIEVEMENTS 

Strategic Research 
Agenda (SRA) 

Revision  of  the  Multi-Annual  Implementation  Plan  finalised.  Revised  targets  for  the 
Application Areas extended to 2020 (from 2015) to better align with Horizon 2020. 

Number of calls in 2011: 1 
Number of proposals submitted: 82 
Number of eligible proposals: 80 
Number of proposals funded: 30 
Global project portfolio: 98 (including 76 signed Grant Agreements)  

Call 
implementation 

Success stories: 
A number of European cities are currently pioneering the development and introduction 
of  city  buses  powered  by  environmentally-friendly  hydrogen  fuel  cells.  The  Clean 
Hydrogen In European Cities project (CHIC) began in November 2010 to promote the 
development  of  hydrogen  fuel  cell  buses  for  public  transport  and  pave  the  way  for 
widespread  use  of  this  technology  and  the  necessary  infrastructure  from  2015.  The 
project  is  an  essential  next  step  towards  full  commercialisation  of  hydrogen  powered 
fuel  cell  buses.  CHIC  aims  to  reduce  the  ‘time  to  market’  for  the  technology  and 
support ‘market lift off’. 

For more information see: http://chic-project.eu/ 

Participation, 
including SMEs 

Total number of participants: 667 
Participants in funded projects: 285 
Number of SMEs in funded projects: 73 – 25.6 % of the total participation 
Participants  by  category  in  funded  projects:  Large  Industry  (PRC):  76;  Research 
organisations  (REC):  77;  Higher  and  Secondary  Education  (HSE):  49;  Public 
Authorities (PUB): 3; Others (OTH): 7 

Participation in funded projects broken down by country: 26 countries involved. 

Top countries  Total participation 

DE 
UK 
FR  
IT 
BE 

67 
36 
31 
30 
26 

Five international partners (the US, Korea, China, Canada and Serbia) took part in FCH 
research activities, with one participant in funded projects each.  

In 2011 FCH developed a new web site, which from March to year end was visited over 
40 000 times. Three major EU events were organised, while the Programme Office and 
the  executive  director  attended  25  external  events  and  conferences,  some  of  them 
outside Europe (in the US, Japan, Korea, China, and Canada). 
FCH  took  part  in  the  joint  JTI  event  hosted  at  the  European  Parliament  on  5  and  6 
October.  

Communication 

Governance 

The Governing Board met three times in 2011. 
In addition to decisions on running the JTI JU, the Board unanimously elected its new 
Chair, Mr Pierre Etienne Franc (of Air Liquide), in June.  

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.4. 

Artemis JU: main achievements in 2011 at a glance 

AREA 

PROGRESS — ACHIEVEMENTS 

Strategic Research 
Agenda (SRA) 

The ARTEMIS Industry Association presented the revised SRA in May. 
The JU then updated its research objectives. 

Call 
implementation 

Participation, 
including SMEs 

Number of calls in 2011: 1 (two-step submission and evaluation) 
Number of proposals submitted (Full Project Proposals): 27 
Number of eligible proposals: 27 
Number of proposals funded: 8 
Global project portfolio: 44  

Total number of participants (Full Project Proposals): 540 
Participants in funded projects: 206 
Number of SMEs in funded projects: 62 – 31 % of total participation 
Participants  by  category  in  funded  projects:  Large  Industry  (PRC):  73;  Research 
organisations (REC) and Higher or Secondary Education (HSE) together: 71. 

Participation in funded projects, broken down by country: 17 countries involved. 

Top countries  Total participations 

ES 
IT 
DE 
FI 
FR 
AT 

31 
28 
23 
19 
15 
15 

Communication 

The US participated in the 2011 call and had 1 project funded. 

ARTEMIS participated in 6 events held jointly with national partners to promote calls 
for proposal and project results among stakeholders and potential beneficiaries. 
The ARTEMIS Industry Association Summer Camp was held in June and followed by 
four other major events. 
ARTEMIS  helped  stage  a  joint  JTI  event  at  the  European  Parliament  on  5  and  6 
October. 
The  magazine  Artemis  was  issued  three  times  and  new  information  brochures  were 
published. In addition, nine articles were published in various EU countries. 
The visual identity of the JTI was improved. 

Governance 

The  Governing  Board  (GB)  met  three  times  and  the  Public  Authorities  Board  (PAB) 
met twice. 
In addition to decisions on running the JTI JU, the GB agreed to include the option of 
hiring Seconded National Experts in the Multi-Annual Staff Policy Plan. 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.5. 

ENIAC JU: main achievements in 2011 at a glance 

AREA 

PROGRESS — ACHIEVEMENTS 

Call 
implementation 

Number  of  calls  in  2011:  2  (call  1  used  a  two-step  submission  and  evaluation 
procedure; call 2 a one-step procedure). 
Number of proposals submitted (Full Project Proposals): 17 
Number of eligible proposals: 16 
Number of proposals funded: 12 
Global project portfolio: 40 

Success stories: 
The  E3Car  project  started  in  February  2008  with  the  aim  of  tackling  the  main 
challenges  in  the  management  of  the  electrical  vehicle  power  train  and  reducing  the 
energy  lost  in  the  intermediate  stages  of  the  power  train.  E3Car  won  an  innovation 
award in November 2011 for its major achievements in many developments on several 
key components, in particular: 
- improvement of power conversion and distribution by 10 %; 
- increase in energy efficiency by 35 % overall. 
The  project  achieved  28  demonstrators  and  generated  an  architectural  view  of  the 
electrical  vehicle  and  7  more  collaborative  projects  on  electric  mobility,  mobilising 
more than 100 partners with a total budget of €
For more information see: http://www.e3car.eu/ 

 180m. 

Participation, 
including SMEs 

Total number of participants (Full Project Proposals): 286 
Participants in funded projects: 195 
Number of SMEs in funded projects: 74 – 37.9 % of total participations 
Participants  by  category  in  funded  projects:  Large  Industry  (PRC):  71;  Research 
organisations (REC): 50 

Participation in funded projects, broken down by country: 19 countries involved. 

Top countries  Total participations 

NL 
DE 
IT 
FR 
AT 

49 
29 
26 
21 
12 

Five participants from Israel took part in call 2, joining winning consortia.  

Communication 

ENIAC held 10 ‘face to face’ meetings with Member States/public authorities. It helped 
organise the EU Nanoelectronic Forum and presented the new ‘ENIAC JU Innovation 
Award’ at the event. 
ENIAC helped stage the joint JTI event at the European Parliament on 5 and 6 October. 
ENIAC also participated in a number of international events.  

Governance 

The  Governing  Board  (GB)  met  three  times  and  the  Public  Authorities  Board  (PAB) 
met five times in 2011. 
In  addition  to  decisions  on  running  the  JTI  JU,  the  GB  decided  to  launch  a  call  for 
Expressions of Interest for pilot lines related to Key Enabling Technology (KETs).  

EN 

27 

   EN