COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA FACTS AND FIGURES 2014 Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT European Research Area Progress Report 2014
Date: 2014-09-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic growth, innovation, research and development, research programme, scientific cooperation













EUR-Lex - 52014SC0280 - EN











|



52014SC0280

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA FACTS AND FIGURES 2014 Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT European Research Area Progress Report 2014 /* SWD/2014/0280 final */









Facts and Figures
accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014
Contents
1..... Introduction
and preliminary remarks. 3
2..... Why ERA?. 5
3..... ERA
Priorities. 9
3.1.     Effectiveness of national
research systems. 9
3.1.1.       National strategies for
R&I. 10
3.1.1.       Public funding for R&D
and its evolution. 10
3.1.2.       Competition for public
funding. 12
3.1.3.       Institutional funding. 14
3.2.     In terms of pan-European
cooperation and competition. 15
3.2.1.       Transnational cooperation. 15
3.2.2.       International cooperation. 18
3.2.3.       Interoperability. 21
3.2.4.       Financial commitments for
the construction and operation of European Strategy Forum on Research
Infrastructures (ESFRI), national, regional research infrastructures (RIs) of
pan-European interest 23
3.2.5.       Access to RIs of
pan-European interest 24
3.3.     An open labour market for
researchers. 24
3.3.1.       Open, transparent and
merit based recruitment of researchers. 25
3.3.2.       Researchers' careers. 27
3.3.3.       Support structured
innovative doctoral training programmes. 27
3.3.4.       Removing the barriers to
international mobility. 28
3.3.5.       Support mobility between
private and public sector 31
Graphs
Graph 1: Number of institutions (left) and share of
institutions weighted by number of researchers (right) in each ERA cluster,
2013. 5
Graph 2: Share of RPOs (weighted) by cluster of ERA
compliance, 2013. 6
Graph 3: Outputs by RPOs according to their cluster of
ERA compliance, 2013. 7
Graph 4: Share of organisations within each cluster
implementing some of the ERA actions (according to their ERA compliance), 2013. 8
Graph 5: GBAORD per capita, 2012 (in EUR) 11
Graph 6: Evolution of GBAORD compared with total
government expenditures (2007=1) 12
Graph 7: Allocation of funding according to different
modalities, by funders in Member States, 2013  12
Graph 8: Share of funder's R&D budget dedicated to
joint defined research agendas with non-national funders, 2013. 16
Graph 9: Share of R&D budget allocated to
collaboration programmes carried out with third countries, 2013  19
Graph 10: Share of organisations' R&D budget
originating from third countries, 2013. 21
Graph 11: Share of funders which can base their project
based R&D decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national funders,
2013. 22
Graph 12: Share of project based R&D budget allocated
through peer review carried out by funders outside the country, 2013. 22
Graph 13: Open, excellent and attractive research systems
and innovation performance (2014) 25
Graph 14: Share of university-based researchers satisfied
with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and
made known by their institution, Europe (2012) (%) 26
Graph 15: New doctoral graduates per thousand population
aged 25-34, EU-27, US and Japan, 2000-2011  27
Graph 16: Types of queries received by EURAXESS Service
Centres 2010-2013. 30
Tables
Table 1: Classification of countries according to ERA
policies and implementation of the ERA actions  4
Table 2: Correlations between the share of RPOs
(weighted) (2013) with three indicators of  performance  8
Maps
Map 1: Classification of EU Member States according to
support to project based funding in the R&I strategy and the share of
funding allocated as project based by funders, 2013. 13
Map 2: Classification of EU Member States according to
the identification of measures in support of institutional funding allocated on
the results of institutional assessment and the share of funding allocated by
funders using this modality, 2013. 14
Map 3: Classification of EU Member States according to
the measures in support of the implementation of joint research agendas and
financial support provided by funders, 2013. 17
Map 4: Classification of EU Member States according to
the measures in support of collaboration with third countries and the share of
funding allocated by funders to this type of activity, 2013. 20

1.         
Introduction and preliminary remarks

The Commission has developed the ERA
Monitoring Mechanism (EMM) with the objective of assessing progress in the
compliance of ERA at three different but interrelated levels: national and
regional policies, funders and research performing organisations (RPOs). 
This report presents progress observed in
Member States in terms of adoption of measures in support of ERA[1]. In collaboration with Member States and some Associated Countries[2],
the Commission identified new measures and updated the contents of last year’s
state of play. 
It also presents - for the first time and
based on results from the ERA survey 2014[3]
- the state of play in terms of support provided by funders (RFOs) for the
adoption of ERA measures as well as the implementation of ERA in the different
research performing organisations (RPO). 
For the funders’ level, there are no
official sources of information on ERA implementation, which motivated the
Commission to launch the first ERA survey in 2012. The responses to the first
exercise were not sufficiently representative. Member States suggested fine-tuning
the indicators for the purpose of this exercise. Therefore, the indicators to
use and the questionnaire of the ERA survey 2014 have been discussed and agreed
with Member States which participate in the European Research Area Committee (ERAC)
ad hoc group on the EU semester and ERA monitoring[4]. Strong support by
national authorities motivated many funders to answer the survey.
For the RPO level most information on ERA
implementation did not exist in official statistical sources. The first ERA
survey in 2012 raised a great deal of interest. However, the questionnaire was
too long and gathered too much information which turned out not to be necessary
to estimate ERA implementation. Therefore, the indicators to use and the
questionnaire to employ have also been discussed and agreed with Member States
which participate in the ERAC ad hoc group on the EU semester and ERA
monitoring4. The ERA survey 2014 received a similar number of
responses as in the 2012 exercise. 
The results presented in the report provide
an indication of the situation only among those institutions which
responded to the survey[5],
which include funders which manage 34% of total GBAORD in the EU, and
performers which employ 32% of total staff and 20% of researchers in RPOs. The
constituency in the survey gathers 20% of the most important RPOs as identified
by Member States[6].

All indicators have been estimated
weighting the answers provided by the organisations. In the case of funders,
the answers were weighted by the total funding managed by the responding
funders institutions, in comparison with the total funding handled at national
or EU level. In the case of RPOs, the results were weighted by the number of
researchers (headcount) in the institutions and compared with the total number
of researchers in the responding organisations (at national or EU level).
Throughout the analysis it will be shown
that the level of ERA implementation varies across countries, reflecting the
national situations and contexts. To classify the countries two criteria were
used. The first is the existence of specific measures in support of ERA as
identified by Commission services. The second is the level of implementation by
funders and/or RPOs in comparison with the EU average. In the absence of
targets or identified desirable levels of implementation, it is difficult to
identify and assess an adequate level of ERA implementation for each of the
actions. Whenever meaningful, the degree of support and the implementation are
compared with the average observed at EU level. The use of the EU average does
not imply that it should be considered to target a desirable level of
implementation. On this basis, four (or in some cases five) possible groups
could be identified (see Table 1).
Table 1: Classification of countries according to
ERA policies and implementation of the ERA actions
   || Specific measures in support of ERA || No specific measures in support of ERA 
 Implementation above EU average || Top-down ERA proactive || Bottom-up ERA proactive 
 Implementation below EU average || Limited implementation by stakeholders || Limited measures and limited implementation 
 Limited measures and no implementation 
It should be noted that
the EU averages are influenced by the high response rate by German institutions
and the low responses by UK RPOs. They influence the average in both
directions: upwards in situations where the country’s institutions are very
advanced in the implementation of ERA, and downwards on a few other issues for
which the level of implementation by German institutions is low.
Finally, it should be noted that the
results have to be analysed and used with care by Member States and the
Commission.  Responding organisations did not provide any answer for a number
of questions, which requires further analysis to explain this lack of responsiveness.
Therefore, Member States are invited to check the scope of the results with
their constituency when identifying their national policy priorities.  
Nevertheless, it is expected that the
results included in this report which accompanies the recently adopted
Commission’s Communication ‘Research and innovation as sources of renewed
growth’ will help Member States and Stakeholders in identifying areas where
more effort is needed on ERA implementation. 

2.         
Why ERA?
 
 –      Compliance to ERA differentiates RPOs and also research performance. –      ERA compliant organisations produce more patent applications and publications by researcher. –      ERA related reforms are still needed, even among ERA compliant organisations, and in some countries, the importance of organisations in the limited compliance to ERA clusters calls for serious attention by the authorities. 
Statistical analysis[7] of the responses to the
ERA survey 2014 indicates that three types of organisations can be singled out
according to their compliance to ERA: 
•           ERA compliant:
organisations which are implementing some or all of the ERA actions with high
intensity.
•           Limited compliance to ERA:
organisations which are implementing some of the ERA actions with low intensity.

•           ERA not applicable: organisations
in which research is a minor activity or in which the implementation of the ERA
actions is not compatible with their mandate.
In terms of number of organisations, the
second cluster, Limited compliance to ERA, is the largest. However, the
importance of the clusters varies significantly when the number of institutions
is weighted by the number of researchers. Then the cluster ERA compliant becomes
the largest, gathering 81% of the researchers (see Graph 1)
Graph 1: Number
of institutions (left) and share of institutions weighted by number of
researchers (right) in each ERA cluster, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014 
NB: International organisations are not
considered in the graph.
It should be mentioned that these figures
concern research performing organisations which answered the ERA survey in
2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers
employed in the private and public sector).
As shown below, the importance of the
clusters (weighted) varies between countries. According to the ERA survey
results, in MT, CY, SI and HR, most of the organisations are in the 'Limited
compliance' cluster. In CZ, EL and SK the share of organisations is similar in
the clusters 'Limited compliance' and 'ERA compliant' (see Graph 2).
Graph 2: Share
of RPOs (weighted) by cluster of ERA compliance, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
According to the ERA survey 2014 results, a
higher the share of publications and a higher the number of patent applications
are  observed in the ERA compliance cluster in the sample. This result is due
not only to the higher number of researchers in the cluster, but also because
researchers in this cluster are respectively 15% and 50% more productive on
publications[8]
and patent applications than in the cluster Limited compliance to ERA (see Graph 3).
Graph 3: Outputs
by RPOs according to their cluster of ERA compliance, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
A positive correlation is also observed between
national performance indicators and the share of organisations in the ERA
compliance group identified through the ERA survey, while it is negative for
the other two clusters. This correlation compares the share of RPOs (weighted)
with three indicators of performance at national level: the first is scientific
and technological research excellence[9],
which can be defined as the top-end quality outcome of systematically performed
creative work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge and new
applications; the second is the Innovation index, as presented in the
Innovation Union scoreboard 2014[10],
and the third is the Innovation output indicator[11]  (see Table 2).
Table 2: Correlations between the share of RPOs
(weighted) (2013) with three indicators of  performance
   || Research Excellence || Innovation Performance || Innovation output indicator 
   || Number || Weighted || Number || Weighted || Number || Weighted 
 ERA compliant || 19% || 52% || 21% || 52% || 21% || 42% 
 Limited ERA compliant || -24% || -43% || -21% || -42% || -30% || -38% 
 ERA not applicable || -2% || -35% || -7% || -40% || 1% || -21% 
Source: Innovation scoreboard, ECFIN, ERA
survey 2014
The implementation, as well as the intensity
of implementation (i.e. frequently vs. occasionally) of ERA actions, is not
homogeneous within the groups. As observed in Graph 4 according to the ERA survey 2014, even
in the ERA compliant cluster the share of institutions implementing the
different ERA actions is not close to 100%. For example, only 50% of the
organisations in this cluster frequently advertise their vacancies in EURAXESS.
Graph 4: Share of organisations within each cluster implementing some of the
ERA actions (according to their ERA compliance), 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
More detail on the situation in each
country is presented in the Country fiches annexed to this document, including
the share of organisations in each cluster. They also include the comparison of
the results at country and EU level for the ERA compliant cluster.

3.         
ERA Priorities
3.1.       
Effectiveness of national research systems.

 –      Guidance through national R&I strategies is present in almost all countries. –      Differences in R&I funding remain. –      The importance of competitive funding through calls for proposals is difficult to identify. Institutional funding based on institutional assessment is not broadly used by Member States. However, survey results show that the latter is associated with better performance by researchers in RPOs. 
Improving the effectiveness of national
research systems is an important priority in ERA. Competition to access public
funding is an important factor linked with effectiveness. Before presenting the
state of play on the allocation mechanisms at national level, the next sections
present a brief update on national R&I strategies and the related public
funding. 

3.1.1.         
National strategies for R&I

R&I strategies are important as they
present the priorities of national and/or regional authorities in these fields.
The Commission could identify that all Member States with the exception of Portugal have adopted a national strategy for R&I. In IT, MT, RO and SK the strategies
have been adopted/adapted since 2013. There are specific mentions to all or
some of the ERA priorities in the strategies of AT, DE, ES, FI, HU, IT, LU, MT,
RO, SE, SI, SK and the UK.
For its part, the Commission launched the
Smart Specialisation Platform (S3 Platform) in 2012 to support EU countries and
regions in the preparation and development of their smart specialisation
strategies, facilitating mutual learning and sharing of tools, techniques and
practice through a genuine bottom-up approach. By the end of June 2014, more
than 150 EU regions and 15 EU countries had registered on the Platform and the
vast majority have participated in at least one mutual learning or sharing
workshop. In particular, the S3 Platform has developed its own peer-review
methodology, which allowed around 60 EU regions and countries to submit their
smart specialisation strategy to their peers and experts, receive feedback and
decide on the appropriate follow-up action to take. This has been the most
comprehensive mutual learning support tool ever launched by the Commission on
regional R&I strategies, and proved to be well received by the
stakeholders. A more thematic approach was launched in 2013, first via the
establishment of the Eye@RIS3, an on-line publicly accessible mapping tool,
which gathers the R&I priorities declared by regions and countries in their
smart specialisation strategies, and second via the organisation of specific
workshops/events around 'common issues' raised by regional or national
policy-makers (e.g. the involvement of universities and science parks, the
discussion of common priorities, the role of key enabling technologies etc.). 
Also, the Commission organised and funded
15 expert groups which visited EE, LT, LV, SK, SI, HU, RO, BG, PL, CZ, EL, ES
and PT in order to help local authorities responsible for R&I in preparing their
Smart Specialisation Strategies. The reports were formally sent to all relevant
Commission services plus the relevant Permanent Representations of these Member
States. The reports were extremely pertinent to the governments of these
countries as they helped to identify both weaknesses and proposed solutions.
Since February 2014, 11 institutions were
awarded an ERA Chair for a period of five years. A new call under Horizon 2020
- Widespread - was published on 11 December 2013 with a call deadline on 15
October 2014. The budget for this call is EUR 34 million. The ERA Chairs brings
outstanding researchers to universities and other research institutions that
have high potential for research excellence. From their side, institutions
mobilise support from different funding sources, including the ESIF, to invest
in facilities and infrastructures in the context of their national/regional
Smart Specialisation Strategies and commit to institutional change in addition
to broader support for innovation. 

3.1.1.         
Public funding for R&D and its evolution

In terms of public funding for research
measured through the Global Budget Appropriations or Outlays on Research and
Development (GBAORD), big differences remain. Expenses in R&D per citizen
are 39 times higher in LU than in BG (See Graph 5). The differences are partly
explained by differences in national income and purchasing power. However, it
should be noted that GBAORD does not consider other efforts undertaken by
national authorities in support of R&D such as tax incentives, credits,
etc. whose importance has risen in the past few years, but for which limited
information is available.
Graph 5: GBAORD per capita, 2012
(in EUR)
Source: DG RTD based on Eurostat
In terms of the evolution of public funding
for research, when compared with total government expenditures the situation
also varies greatly among countries. Since the crisis (2007), in the graph
below it can be observed that countries above the line have increased their
GBAORD in 2012 more than total government expenditures demonstrating the high
importance given to R&D (see Graph 6). In the others, fiscal
consolidation has been carried out at the expense of R&D (BE, IE, ES, FR,
IT, CY, LV, LT, HU, NL, RO, SI, FI, UK). It should be recalled that these
figures do not include tax incentives for innovation, which in some cases have
been increased in the last few years (at least in FR, NL, UK).
Graph 6: Evolution
of GBAORD compared with total government expenditures (2007=1)
Source: DG RTD based on Eurostat[12]

3.1.2.         
Competition for public funding

Project based funding is the most important
way to induce competition in research. The Commission could identify support to
the implementation of project based funding in the national R&I strategies
in 21 Member States: AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT, LT,
LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SE, UK. 
According to the results of the ERA survey
2014 (see Graph 7), project
based is allocated by funders in all Member States, with an average of 64% of
their R&D funding allocated using this modality[13]. Funders in four Member
States allocate all their funding using this modality. 
Graph 7:
Allocation of funding according to different modalities, by funders in Member
States, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results funders which
answered the ERA survey allocate a higher share of their funding as project
based than the EU average in 20 Member States.
Map 1: Classification of EU Member States
according to support to project based funding in the R&I strategy and the
share of funding allocated as project based by funders, 2013
Among the other Member States where the
share is lower than the EU average, the Commission could identify specific
measures supporting the implementation of project based funding in AT, BE, CZ,
DE, ES, IT and LT, whilst in one country (SI) the Commission could not identify
any specific measures.
Evaluation mechanisms used for the
allocation of project based funding should comply with high standards. The
Commission could identify provisions supporting peer review in all Member States.
However, these principles vary and are not uniformly used: the Commission
identified that in 21 MS the principles are expected to be used in all calls (AT,
BE, CZ, DK, EE, EL, FI, FR, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK)
while in the rest of the Member States they are expected to be used in some
calls (BG, CY, DE, ES, HU, LV, PT).

3.1.3.         
Institutional funding

Institutional assessment linked with
institutional funding is another powerful mechanism to promote competition in
research and increase the effectiveness of national expenditures. The
Commission could identify measures to support the allocation of institutional
funding based on institutional performance in 17 Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY,
DE, DK, EE, FI, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, NL, SE, SK, UK). 
In terms of implementation of institutional
assessment for institutional funding, according to the ERA survey 2014 results,
funding agencies in 18 of the 22 countries which allocate institutional funding
base part or all of it on some form of institutional assessment, while in the
other four countries they do not (BG, FI, EL, HU) (see Map 2). 
Map 2: Classification
of EU Member States according to the identification of measures in support of
institutional funding allocated on the results of institutional assessment and
the share of funding allocated by funders using this modality, 2013
Among the six Member States whose agencies
declared that they do not allocate institutional funding, four Member States (CY,
HR, LU, SK) have policies in place to address this issue. In the other two, the
Commission could not identify any measure (MT, RO). It should be noted that
some funders in some countries did not report their funding modalities.
Almost 70% of researchers in the ERA survey
2014 belong to institutions whose institutional funding is linked to
institutional assessment. Of them, 88% are in the ERA compliant cluster.

3.2.       
In terms of pan-European cooperation and
competition
3.2.1.         
Transnational cooperation
 
 –      The relevance given to transnational cooperation is increasing at strategic level in most countries –      Differences in share of budget allocated to transnational cooperation are important (1:21) –      Several large initiatives (ERA-Nets, Article 185 initiatives, joint programming initiatives (JPIs)) are continued and/or enhanced in Horizon 2020, increasing the coordination and effectiveness of European research 
Europe is facing a
number of societal challenges for which a combined effort on R&I is needed.
The Framework Programme Horizon 2020 is a major facilitator of cross-border
research based on excellence. However, in some cases this effort may be
insufficient and combined actions by several Member States may be required. The
Commission could identify willingness to foster transnational cooperation in
national R&I strategies in more than half of the Member States (AT, BG, CZ,
DE, DK, EL, ES, FR, HU, IT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI). 
The Commission, through its ERA-NET scheme
continues to provide financial support from the framework programme by
co-funding calls and other joint activities related to the coordination of
national/regional R&D programmes. For example, ERA-NET Cofund E-Rare action
now coordinates, in combination with Horizon 2020 activities, 40% of all research
in the field within ERA. National ministries and their funding agencies
appreciate it as a powerful tool, creating joint transnational calls between
national programmes with an almost constant total volume of EUR 400 - 500
million per year. They have also used the scheme to launch a broad variety of
additional activities that strongly support the realisation of ERA. 
In May 2014 Parliament and Council adopted
the four Article 185 initiatives, which are research programmes undertaken
jointly by several Member States, proposed by the Commission as part of the
Innovation Investment Package (IIP), based on Article 185 TFEU. In total, the
Commission will invest EUR 1.5 billion from Horizon 2020 in the four
initiatives. These activities contribute to the coordination of national
research programmes. For example, the Article 185 initiative on Metrology now
coordinates 50% of the European research and is considered the leading
metrology research programme in the world. Further initiatives might follow
after the mid-term review of Horizon 2020.  
Joint programming initiatives aim to pool
national research efforts to tackle common European challenges more effectively
in a few key areas (10 since 2010). For example, the JPI on Neurodegenerative
diseases contributed to an increase in overall investment to tackle the major
societal challenges (from less than EUR 100 million to EUR 350 million), it
increased coordination of research in ERA (from less than 5% to 10% of all ERA
research in the field), attracted 'Foreign Direct Investment' from Canada and
will eventually contribute to more effective research in Europe. They are led
by Member States and have only received EU support for their set-up phase. Most
JPIs have now adopted joint strategic research agendas setting their priorities
and some have multi-annual implementation plans. In total their joint
activities up to the end of 2013 amounted to more than 20 joint calls and joint
actions for a total of more than EUR 200 million. However, this amount is still
of a limited size considering that at European level[14], with the exclusion of
the Framework programme and the European Funding Agency funding, less than 1%
of national public R&D funding is spent on transnational research.
Finally, a specific focus has been developed
within the Smart Specialisation Platform (S3 Platform) on trans-national
co-operation, through the establishment of permanent liaisons with two EU
macro-regional strategies (those for the Baltic Sea Region and the Danube
Region). The contribution has been methodologically targeted to the
identification of concrete issues through the decisive involvement of
stakeholders. The Danube region stakeholders focused on financial support of
trans-national R&I projects, while the Baltic Sea Regions stakeholders focused
on the priority-setting process and the subsequent identification of concrete
joint projects.
According to the results of the ERA survey
2014, the average share of funding dedicated to joint research agendas[15] among the funders
which answered the survey is 1.42% of their R&D budgets[16] (see Graph 8). The 'intensity' of support for the
implementation of joint research agendas varies from very low shares to a
maximum of almost 30% in the case of Malta. In the latter case, the high figure
may reflect a specific project and not a regular thrust. 
Graph 8: Share
of funder's R&D budget dedicated to joint defined research agendas with
non-national funders, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 3), according to the ERA survey funders
in almost half (13) of Member States funders dedicate a higher share of funding
to joint R&D agendas with other EU countries than the EU average. 
Map 3: Classification
of EU Member States according to the measures in support of the implementation
of joint research agendas and financial support provided by funders, 2013
In the other 15 Member States the share of
funder’s budget dedicated to these issues is below the EU average or non-existent.
Among them, in six cases (BG, CZ, DE, EL, ES, SI), the Commission could
identify support for the implementation of joint research whilst in other countries
(CY, EE, IE, LT, LV, UK), the Commission could not identify any explicit measure
or strategy. In three cases, the funders did not report any support (HR, HU, SK).
Given the importance of the societal
challenges that Europe is facing in addition to R&D budgetary evolutions
presented above, Member States may consider the possibility of further coordinating
their research efforts whilst allocating more resources to their
implementation.

3.2.2.         
International cooperation
 
 –      Member States are increasingly open to international cooperation –      Horizon 2020 is open to the participation of legal entities from across the world. The Commission will seek to enhance international cooperation through: –      horizontal activities –      targeted activities across the societal challenges –      enabling and industrial technologies –      other relevant parts of Horizon 2020 
Openness of ERA to the rest of the world is
an important factor for knowledge generation both in Europe and abroad. The
Commission has been able to identify specific support in 12 Member States: AT,
CZ, DE, DK, FR, IT, NL, RO, SE, SI, SK and the, UK. In three of these
countries, new measures were proposed/adopted in 2014.
Regarding international cooperation, 85% of
the National Rectors’ Conferences (NRCs) surveyed by EUA in 2013 indicated the
existence of international research collaborations at national level. Results
also showed that EU Countries partner with other EU Countries, Associated Countries
and third countries on an equal basis (point validated by 90% of the respondent
NRCs). In particular, regarding bilateral agreements with third countries, NRCs
indicated the existence of agreements with the United States of America, Canada, Japan, China, Brazil, and Russia. Other countries, such as India or South Africa, were also mentioned, although less frequently.
According to the ERA survey 2014 results,
funders in more than half (17) of Member States allocate an average of 0.7% of
their budget to collaboration programmes with third countries, ranging up to
almost 4.3% in Germany[17]
(see Graph 9). 
Graph 9: Share
of R&D budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third
countries, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results among the
funders in the 19 countries which indicated that they dedicate funding to
international cooperation, in six of them funders dedicate a higher share of
funding than the EU average (more than 2.4% of their funding). Among them, in five
countries (DE, DK, FR, NL, UK) the Commission could identify policy support. Funders
declared that there is no budget allocated to these activities in BG, CY, EE,
HR, HU, IE, LU, MT and SK.
Map 4: Classification
of EU Member States according to the measures in support of collaboration with
third countries and the share of funding allocated by funders to this type of
activity, 2013
In the other 13 Member States there are two
situations. In six countries (AT, CZ, IT, RO, SE, SI), the Commission could
identify measures in support of international cooperation whilst in three others
(BE, EL, ES, FI, LT, LV, PL), the Commission could not identify any explicit
measure or strategy. 
In order to step up the intensity of
international cooperation in R&D, in September 2012 the Commission adopted
a Communication entitled "Enhancing and focusing EU international
cooperation in R&D: a strategic approach[18]".
With this Communication, the Commission called for making better informed, and
therefore more strategic, choices as regards the areas selected for cooperation
and the international partners with whom to engage, in particular with a view
to preparing for the implementation of Horizon 2020. 
In line with the aim of the new strategy,
the Commission's ambition is to increase the participation of legal entities
from international partner countries in Horizon 2020 projects and, more generally,
to enhance international cooperation activities supported or catalysed through
Horizon 2020. Integrating international cooperation into the first Horizon 2020
work programmes, strengthening communication on the openness of Horizon 2020 to
the participation of international partners and enhancing cooperation with the
external funding instruments and overall EU external policies have been major
points of attention during the two years of implementation of the Commission's new
international cooperation strategy.
Another important factor linked with
international cooperation is that RPOs may attract funding from third countries,
both from the public and the private sector. The degree of funding received may
reflect the attractiveness of the RPO in the country. According to the results
of the ERA survey 2014[19],
research performers in 24 Member States receive part of their funding from
third countries, ranging from very low shares up to almost 9% in the case of Hungary (see Graph 10).
Graph 10: Share
of organisations' R&D budget originating from third countries, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014

3.2.3.         
Interoperability
 
 –      Mutual recognition of evaluation results is linked with funding allocation, opening the way for more interoperability 
Cross border cooperation and implementation
of joint research agendas will be facilitated by the adoption of common
procedures and standards, but also by delegating some of the task to other
actors beyond the national borders. This is the case, for example, when funding
agencies in one country fund their constituency on the basis of results of an
evaluation carried out by a stakeholder in another country. 
According to the ERA survey 2014, funders
in 24 Member States can base their project based funding on evaluation results
from non-national funders (see Graph 11), even if the proportion of funders
which can do so varies significantly between countries. It should be recalled
that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which
represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
Graph 11: Share
of funders which can base their project based R&D decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national funders, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
Also, according to the ERA survey 2014
results the proportion of funding allocated using this modality by funders
which answered the survey varies greatly (see Graph 12). 
Graph 12: Share
of project based R&D budget allocated through peer review carried out by
funders outside the country, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
NB: funders in Croatia which answered the
ERA survey indicated that 100% of their project based funding is allocated
using this modality. It was not included in the graph to facilitate the
presentation of the results for the other countries.
To facilitate interoperability, the
Commission prepared and held a workshop on “Why and how to facilitate
cross-border research operations in ERA?” in February 2013, addressing the
issue of the potential ERA-Mark, proposed in the ERA Communication of July
2012, as a voluntary label for attesting that national research programmes
possess criteria that would facilitate trans-national collaboration with other
programmes. Key conclusions were that it is an interesting concept and that the
ERA Mark could provide more action and evidence at EU-level. However, it was
also concluded that it will need to be periodically renewed, opened to
international partners and that a wide range of stakeholders need to be
involved in the development of the concept to make the ERA Mark happen (RPOs, the
European Network of Innovation Agencies (TAFTIE), structural funds experts,
etc.)
In addition, to test the feasibility of
synchronised calls in Horizon 2020, in 2014 the Commission launched an open call
(CSA) in order to fund the process. However, the Commission did not receive any
proposals. 

3.2.4.         
Financial commitments for the construction and
operation of European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI),
national, regional research infrastructures (RIs) of pan-European interest
 
 –      The commitment to have completed or launched the construction of at least 60% of the ESFRI roadmap projects by 2015 is in reach –      Member States should regularly report their financial contribution to the development of  the RIs included in the ESFRI roadmap –      The development of the Charter of Access for Research Infrastructures is well advanced 
ESFRI is a strategic instrument to develop
the scientific integration of Europe and to strengthen its international
outreach. As confirmed by the Council on 26 May 2014, Member States commit to
focus their available national resources on the respective prioritised projects
in which they are financially participating.
The commitment under the Innovation Union
of the Member States and the Commission to have completed or launched the
construction of at least 60% of the ESFRI roadmap projects by 2015 is in reach.
The prioritisation of the ESFRI roadmap projects confirmed by Council in May
2014 will allow Member States and the Commission to give additional support for
reaching this objective. Progress can also be seen from the report that is to
be presented by the Commission to Council and Parliament, concerning the
application of the European Research Infrastructure Consortium Regulation (ERIC)
in which it is stated that although the take up of the new legal instrument was
relatively slow, with the establishment of seven ERICs and the prospect of
reaching about 15 ERICs in 2015, momentum seems to have been reached by Member
States using this instrument which will lead to a further fulfilment of the
ERA.
Most Member States (22) have national
roadmaps for the development of RIs (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR,
HU, IE, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK, soon HR)[20]. Among these countries,
the intention to contribute to the development of ESFRI in national roadmaps in
21 cases (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IE, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO,
SE, SI, SK, UK). Upon the Commission’s request for the purpose of the current
report, only two Member States (SE, UK) were able to report its financial
contribution to the development of the RIs included in the ERA roadmap, while
financial indications are present in several national roadmaps for RIs.
Member States should enhance their efforts
in identifying and reporting the actual financial contributions from the Member
States to the development of the RIs included in the ESFRI roadmap.

3.2.5.         
Access to RIs of pan-European interest

The competitive and open access to high
quality RIs supports and benchmarks the quality of the activities of European
scientists and attracts the best researchers from around the world.
Under the Commission initiative, progress
has been made in the development of a Charter of Access for Research
Infrastructures which is to be published at the beginning of 2015 and would
allow for a more efficient use of these European infrastructures by users from across
 Europe.
In addition, the Commission could identify the
existence of a strategy to support the competitive and open access to RIs in 12
Member States (BG, EL, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO, SK, UK) and specific supporting
measures in AT, DE, EL, ES, HU, IE, LT, NL, PT and the UK.

3.3.       
An open labour market for researchers

An open and attractive labour market for
researchers is an essential component of the ERA. Significant progress has been
made in removing or alleviating some of the obstacles to mobility, improving
doctoral training and making research careers more attractive, albeit to
varying degrees across countries. 
Across the EU, Member States and/or
institutions have introduced a range of measures, programmes, strategies and
legislative acts. This includes, for example, measures to make research a more
attractive career option through the implementation of the European Charter for
Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers. Work
has also centred on enhancing the quality of doctoral training, in particular
to prepare doctoral candidates for a career outside academia, and on measures
to improve researchers' career development opportunities through, for example,
life-long learning.
For its part, the Commission has focused
efforts on a series of policy initiatives which have contributed to the overall
progress. This includes further development of the EURAXESS network, in
particular a large increase in the publication of research job vacancies, the
revised "Scientific Visa Directive", the Human Resources Strategy for
Researchers based on the Charter and Code, the European Principles of
Innovative Doctoral Training and support for a new pan-European supplementary
pension fund for researchers. Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions have also had
a pronounced structuring impact on ERA by setting standards for research
training, attractive employment conditions and open recruitment for all
EU-researchers, and by aligning national resources as well as influencing
regional or national programmes through the Co-fund mechanism.
Progress has nevertheless been uneven and a
number of challenges remain, in particular in a number of Member States where
the lack of open, transparent and merit-based recruitment gives cause for
concern, where intersectoral mobility is relatively low or where working
conditions and career opportunities are rather limited. A concerted and
coordinated effort is needed from the Member States and institutions together
with the Commission.

3.3.1.         
Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of
researchers

Evidence shows that countries with open and
attractive research systems are strong performers in terms of research excellence
and innovation (see Graph 13).
While several factors play a role in determining whether a system is open and
attractive, it is clear that open, transparent and merit-based (OTM)
recruitment is a prerequisite. Open competition enables hiring of the best
researchers, at all career stages and fosters effective geographical mobility.
This is important because recent research by the OECD[21] shows that 'on
average, the research impact of scientists who change affiliations across
national boundaries is nearly 20% higher than that of those who never move
abroad.' OTM recruitment also has the potential to match supply and demand
across Europe and can have a positive impact on equal opportunities for men and
women.
Graph 13: Open,
excellent and attractive research systems and innovation performance (2014)
Source: DG Research and Innovation
calculations based on Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014
While policymakers generally understand the
recruitment systems in place to be OTM, a substantial share of researchers do
not perceive OTM as such, which potentially acts as a major disincentive to
start or remain in a research career. The results from the MORE2 survey
demonstrate strong country specificity in levels of satisfaction with open
recruitment. Additionally those in the early career researcher stages are most
dissatisfied with the openness and transparency of their recruitment and female
researchers show lower levels of satisfaction than males: data shows that
around 40% of researchers associated to European universities were
'dissatisfied' with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly
advertised and made known by their institution. This average masks significant
differences between countries, e.g., while 22% of researchers in the UK were not satisfied, the figures increased to 54% in Portugal, 55% in Greece and 69% in Italy (see Graph 14). 
Graph 14: Share
of university-based researchers satisfied with the extent to which research job
vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution, Europe (2012)
(%)
 
Source: MORE2 Study
The European Code of Conduct for the
recruitment of researchers has had a positive but limited impact, due to its
voluntary nature, on OTM recruitment procedures. Moreover, the majority of
individual institutions which have received the Human Resources for Researchers
Excellence logo have reviewed, or are in the process of reviewing, their
recruitment processes. As part of Horizon 2020, there is now an obligation on
beneficiaries (Article 32 of the Grant Agreement) to take all necessary
measures to implement the Code of Conduct. 
One prerequisite for OTM recruitment is to
ensure publication of the vacancy. In this regard, following concerted efforts
by the Commission, several Member States and institutions, the number of
research vacancies posted on EURAXESS Jobs continues to grow from 7,500 in 2010
to over 40,000 in 2013. This excellent progress, which is helping to match
demand and supply across borders, has been boosted by national legislation to
make it mandatory for publicly funded institutions to advertise their positions
on EURAXESS (e.g. Poland, Croatia, Italy) or at least internationally
(Austria). An increasing share of universities and other employers are also
publishing vacancies. NordForsk has renewed its grant agreement for Nordic
Centres of Excellence (NCoE) which includes a mandatory requirement, stating
that any new positions funded by the NCoE grant shall be announced
internationally in open competition and according to OTM recruitment
procedures. Similarly, a survey carried out by the League of European Research Universities
(LERU) in 2013 showed a high degree of compliance with OTM recruitment among
its members.
In line with a recommendation by the
European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) mutual learning workshop
held in March 2014, the Commission intends to work
closely with Member States and stakeholders to produce an OTM recruitment
toolkit/practitioner's guide during 2015, including good-practice examples,
templates, and other material useful for HR practitioners/employers of
researchers.

3.3.2.         
Researchers' careers

Member States continue to support the
implementation of the Charter and Code (C&C)[22] which aims to improve
researchers’ working conditions. More than 480 organisations from 35 countries
in Europe and beyond have explicitly endorsed the principles underlying the
C&C, Many of them are membership or umbrella organisations. 
The Commission’s Human Resources Strategy
for Researchers (HRS4R) supports institutions and funders in the implementation
of the C&C principles in their policies and practices. Award of the ‘HR
Excellence in Research’ logo recognises institutional progress in this process
and helps institutions to promote themselves to prospective research talent as
providers of a favourable work environment. Currently, more than 240
organisations are members of a Strategy Group. As of May 2014, more than 180
organisations have received the logo. A significant proportion of the awarded
logos are within the UK which reflects the strong enabling framework provided
by Vitae. Moreover, thirty stakeholder organisations in the UK have developed the 'Researcher Development Framework', a strategic agenda to train and
support researchers and further improve their skills. In contrast, a number of
other Member States[23]
are underrepresented or absent altogether from the HRS4R.
A feasibility study on a possible certification
mechanism for human resource management found little support among
stakeholders. Nevertheless, the results showed strong support to continue with
the HRS4R and to strengthen the procedure. A series of seminars with
stakeholders is therefore being organised in 2014-2015 to see which areas of
the C&C can be strengthened in the process. SHO partners in the ERA
platform have encouraged their members to engage in the HRS4R process by
organising working groups, high level discussions and workshops, launching
surveys, and improving guidelines.

3.3.3.         
Support structured innovative doctoral training
programmes

Europe has
relatively few researchers employed in the private sector. They make up only
45% of total researchers compared with 78% in the US, 74% in Japan and 62% in China. At the same time Europe continues to train an increasing number of PhDs
(from around 72,000 graduates in 2000 to 115,000 in 2011), at a rate similar to
the US and well above Japan (see Graph 15). Although the majority of PhD graduates will embark on careers
outside of academia (evidence shows that in France, Germany and the UK over 50%
of all PhD degree holders now take up jobs outside academia), early stage
researchers are often inadequately informed about career paths outside of
academia and are not equipped with the necessary skills to work in industry and
other relevant employment sectors. 
Graph 15: New
doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34, EU-27, US and Japan, 2000-2011 
 
Source: Eurostat Education Statistics
The seven Principles for Innovative
Doctoral Training (IDTP), endorsed by the Council in 2011, aim to foster
excellence and a critical mind-set and provide young researchers with
transferable skills and exposure to industry and other employment sectors.
Their wider uptake has been explored through a study[24] on the implementation
of the principles in 2013 (with on-site visits to 20 universities in 16
countries) and Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions support. The study concluded
that the principles are well-accepted, subscribed to by all target groups at
institutional, doctoral, policy and non-academic levels and are considered as a
‘guiding tool’. They are, however, 'not commonly known in the documented form.
Similar ideas or principles, often worded differently, form the basis of
doctoral training across Europe', although the understanding and implementation
of the principles varies. Research excellence seems to be the ‘leading’
principle, based on quality assurance and attractiveness of the
research/institutional environment.
Progress can be observed in several Member
States although the challenge remains in the wider roll-out in terms of reach,
financing and sustainability and the engagement of industry in PhD training.
Examples of good practice include the German Research Foundation which has set
up programmes such as research training groups (Graduiertenkolleg) or the graduate
schools in the Excellence Initiative to increase the quality of doctoral
training. Here the projects have to adhere to principles similar to the IDTP to
receive the funding. Quality assurance is actively pursued in the Vienna
Biocenter where a new position, the Scientific Coordinator, has recently been created
to ensure the quality of the programme. The coordinator will also initiate
changes to the programme e.g. regarding the curriculum (for example,
integrating transferable skills training into the curricula in the context of
an introductory training course), internal communication and information
provision. Interdisciplinarity is at the heart of doctoral education at the University of Ljubljana. In doctoral training the teaching as well as the research is
interdisciplinary. Promoting interdisciplinarity has contributed to an increase
of intra- and inter-institutional cooperation and some efficiency gains have
also been reported. At the Tallinn University of Technology (Estonia), doctorate holders are encouraged to go abroad for a post-doc period and indeed
need to do so in order to apply for funding.
The Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions will
enable around 25,000 doctoral candidates to be recruited by 2020 to
high-quality programmes in Europe. These will provide experience outside
academia, hence developing increased employability skills amongst PhD holders. 
The European University Association (EUA)’s
Council of Doctoral Education (EUA-CDE) has been a strong advocate and promoter
of doctoral education and training reforms through its 'Salzburg Principles', 'Salzburg
II Recommendations' and has contributed to the development of the 'Principles
for Innovative Doctoral Training'.

3.3.4.         
Removing the barriers to international mobility

The researcher population is highly mobile
internationally. Around 31% of EU post-PhD researchers have worked abroad (EU
or worldwide) as researchers for more than three months at least once during
the last ten years.[25]
In terms of impact, the perception among the majority of researchers is that
the mobility experience is largely positive. For example, 80% of
internationally mobile researchers felt that the mobility had a positive impact
on developing their research skills. More than 60% believed that mobility had
(strongly) increased their ‘research output’ (quality of output, citation
impact, patents, number of co-authored publications, etc.). And 55% of
researchers thought that career progression had increased as a result of their
mobility. It is important to note, however, that a significant proportion (40%)
of mobile researchers perceived their mobility experience as having had a
negative effect on two particular aspects, namely their 'job options' and 'progression
in their remuneration'. The reasons behind this are as yet unclear but include
issues such as a lack of recognition of mobility and ‘forced’ mobility.
EU-wide, 68% of doctoral candidates are
nationals studying in their own country.[26]
A further 8% are EU nationals studying in another EU country. The remaining 24%
are from outside the EU. France (35%) and the UK (31%) have relatively high
proportions of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral
candidates in their respective countries. The highest number of non-EU doctoral
candidates enrolled in the EU came from China (7,523) followed by Brazil (3,400), the United States (3,243), Mexico (3, 206) and India (2,903). Numbers from China and India have increased significantly in recent years. 
The Commission, in cooperation with Member
States, has initiated a wide range of initiatives to facilitate researchers’
mobility and increase the attractiveness of Europe as a destination for leading
researchers. These include measures to facilitate access to information on
mobility via EURAXESS, the 'Scientific Visa' package facilitating
administrative procedures for third country researchers entering the European
Community as well as Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and Destination Europe
Events.
In addition, many Member States have
introduced national mobility schemes to boost different types of researcher
mobility (inward, outward and cross-sectoral). Many of these schemes promote
inward mobility from both EU and non-EU countries providing financial
incentives for early stage researchers. The KOLUMB Programme (Poland), for example, awards fellowships to the best young scholars to enable them to stay
(from 6-12 months) at the world’s leading research centres. Non-financial
incentives include measures promoting ‘dual careers’, such as the Dual Career
Network (France, Germany and Switzerland). Some countries provide tax
incentives to facilitate researchers’ mobility in Europe while others such as Ireland offer special visas to attract researchers to engage in research.

3.3.4.1.       
EURAXESS

EURAXESS continues to play a key role for
researchers wishing to pursue their careers in Europe. More than 200 EURAXESS
Service Centres in 40 European countries are responding to the increasing
demand for information and assistance with more than 900,000 queries in the
past six years. In 2013, EURAXESS Ireland launched a new Industry User
Interface for business users. Companies can advertise vacancies, search an
online database of researchers' CVs, access the fast track research visas
system and search for funding support opportunities. The Commission is
exploring the possibility of rolling this out to other countries so that
business users across Europe will have a tailored interface.
EURAXESS Links continue to support European
researchers in the US, Japan, China, India, ASEAN region and, as of 2013, Brazil and Canada. Its mandate has been extended to also support non-European researchers wishing to
move to Europe. For example, EURAXESS Links information officers act as
intermediates between the non-EU country and a EURAXESS Service Centre, thus
speeding up the provision of information.
Graph 16: Types of queries received by EURAXESS
Service Centres 2010-2013 
 
Source: DG RTD - EURAXESS statistics

3.3.4.2.       
Visa procedures

Fast-track immigration is an important
consideration for internationally mobile researchers and is thus an important
factor in helping attract the best global talent to Europe. In March 2013, the
Commission proposed a recast of the Scientific Visa Directive that will set
clearer time limits for national authorities to decide on applications; provide
researchers with greater opportunities to access the labour market during and
after their stay, and facilitate mobility within the EU. The proposed Directive
is under negotiation by the European Parliament and Council. 

3.3.4.3.       
Social security obstacles for mobile researchers

Mobile researchers face obstacles related
to social security, in particular with regard to their pensions. To respond to
this need, the Commission is committed to supporting stakeholders in setting up
pan-European supplementary pension fund(s) for researchers. A Task Force was
created in 2013 to prepare a proposal on the establishment of a pan-European
Retirement Savings Vehicle (RESAVER) for professionals employed by research
organisations. The Commission has foreseen funding under Horizon 2020 to
sponsor the set-up of notably the Institutions or Occupational Retirement
Provision (IORP), the insurance scheme as well as the functional
administration, including the selection of provider(s). The fund should become
operational in early 2015.

3.3.4.4.       
Cross-border access to and portability of
national grants

In January 2014, Science Europe published a
'Practical Guide to Three Approaches to Cross-border Collaboration'. This guide
provides Science Europe Member Organisations and other research organisations
with information and advice on three optional models of collaboration: Money
follows Researcher (MfR), Money follows Co-operation Line and Lead Agency
Procedure. 
Related to the above, Science Europe Member
Organisations have been invited to sign a new ‘Letter of Intent’ to indicate
their intention to implement MfR, where relevant. This is an agreement that can
allow a researcher to take the remainder of a grant with them when moving to a
new country, and is therefore a model of grant portability. Signatories commit
to providing publicly-available information on how this is organised in their
institution, thus improving the transparency and visibility of MfR.  The
Science Europe website will list participating institutions.

3.3.5.         
Support mobility between private and public
sector

Member States have put in place various
measures to boost partnerships between universities, research institutions and
private companies and to better align the skills acquired with the skills
needed. These include the implementation of joint projects, commercialisation
programmes, research traineeships in companies, inter-sectoral mobility
programmes and industrial PhD programmes. For example, the Danish Industrial
PhD Programme aims to offer doctoral training in cooperation with the industry
sector. It is a three-year research project and research training programme
with an industrial focus conducted jointly by a private company, an industrial
PhD candidate and a university. It inspired the European Parliament to fund the
kick-start of the MSCA European Industrial Doctorates. The Fraunhofer Society
in Germany offers doctoral candidates the possibility of pursuing a PhD in
applied research in close collaboration with industry. In addition, in order to
be appointed to a professorship in engineering at a university, or a
professorship in any subject at a university of applied sciences, applicants
need to have gained professional experience outside of academia. The University of Porto has – in cooperation with other Portuguese universities and companies –
a PhD programme that is funded by a new scheme of the national funding agency
to intensify university-industry collaboration.
It is important to note however that, in terms of
intersectoral mobility, only
4% of PhD candidates have experience of working in private industry during
their PhD[27].
The extent of moving out of public sector research into
the private sector for a short period during doctoral studies or thereafter is
still very much the exception, even though it is perceived as potentially
beneficial for a researcher’s career, access to funding and the exploitation of
research results. The topic was addressed at an ERAC Mutual Learning Workshop
on Human Resources and Mobility in March 2014 which put forward a series of
recommendations.[28]
The European University Association (EUA)
has conducted extensive work on the doctoral level, including through the
DOC-CAREERS II project which looked solely at how universities work with their
regional partners in doctoral education across Europe. The regional focus of
the action allowed EUA to identify examples of university collaboration with
local SMEs, large R&D enterprises, RTD performers, NGO’s and other sectors
(health care, cultural, etc.).
[1] The identification of new measures undertaken by Member States was
based on the analysis of the 2014 National Reform Programmes and also on
information provided by the Joint Research Centre, notably the specific
analysis of the implementation at national level of the ERA Communication
priorities carried out with the support of independent national experts.
[2] It concerns those Associated Countries which indicated their
willingness to participate in the exercise at the Commission’s invitation.
[3] There is no register of public funders or of research performing
organisations in ERA. With the help of national authorities Commission services
developed a list of around 600 public funders and around 8,500 research
performing organisations which were invited to participate in the ERA survey
2014. The organisations were requested to provide the information on a
voluntary basis. This implies that the results are biased, as they correspond only
to the situation in those institutions which answered the survey and not the
overall situation in each Member State. 
[4] See annex 5.1
[5] The use of “micro” data for the identification of ERA
implementation and possibly policy assessment appears to be extremely
interesting. However, the limited response rate restrains the scope of the
results. In future similar exercises Member States and the Commission need to
continue interacting to identify possible ways to further motivate the national
organisations to participate in the exercise. 
[6] Member States were requested to identify among the full list of
organisations the most important research performers in their countries. This
information was matched with the respondents to the survey.
[7] The methodology to identify the clusters is presented in annex
[8] This figure reflects the number of publications by researcher,
excluding the outliers (institutions with more than 5 publications by
researcher) in the sample.
[9] The top-quality output of scientific and technological research
activities at the national level is measured considering four variables: (i) a
field-normalised number of highly cited publications of a country as measured
by the top 10% most cited publications (in all disciplines) per total number of
publications (HICIT); (ii) the number of high quality patent applications of a
country as measured by the number of patent applications filed under the Patent
Cooperation Treaty (PCT) per million inhabitants (PCTPAT); (iii) the number of
world class universities and research institutes in a country as measured by
the number of organisations of a country in the top 250 universities and 50
research institutes divided by gross expenditures in R&D of a country per
(TOPINST); and (iv) the number of high prestige research grants received by a
country as measured by the total value of European Research Council grants
received divided by public R&D expenditures of a country (ERC). For details
see Hardeman et al., 2013.
[10]http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/innovation-scoreboard/index_en.htm 
[11]http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2013/pdf/staff_working_document_indicator_of_innovation_output.pdf

[12] Croatia is not included in the graph as data for this country is
only available for 2012.
[13] It should be noted that these figures concern funders who answered
the ERA survey in 2014 which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[14] This represents 0.2% of total GBAORD for 2012. 
[15] Research funding organisations were asked to indicate their
approximate percentage of the organisation’s overall R&D budget dedicated
to joint research agendas with EU countries in 2013. Joint research agendas
were defined as “annual or multiannual research agendas for a joint programme
between EU Member States outside the framework of the EU Framework Programme.
Joint research agendas include activities such as JPIs and ERA-Net+ where the
bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.”
[16] It should also be noted that these figures concern funders which
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[17] It should be mentioned that these figures concern funders which
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[18] COM(2012) 497
[19] It should be recalled that these figures concern research performing
organisations which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000
researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[20] In five cases, new developments have been observed since 2013 (DE,
EE, NL, HR and BE).
[21] OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2013 Innovation
for Growth
[22] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/europeanCharter

[23] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/strategy4ResearcherOrgs
[24] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/IDT%20Final%20Report%20FINAL.pdf
[25] MORE2 Study on mobility and career paths of researchers
[26] Eurostat Education Statistics
[27] MORE2 study
[28] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/ERAC%20Final%20Report.pdf
Facts and Figures
accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014
Contents
3.4.     In terms of gender equality
and gender content in research. 3
3.4.1.       Gender equality in
research. 3
3.4.2.       Gender balance in decision
making process. 8
3.4.3.       Gender dimension in
research content/programmes. 12
3.4.4.       Gender equality at EU
level 15
Graphs
Graph 17: Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) 3
Graph 18: Share of funders frequently supporting gender
equality in research and the inclusion of gender dimension in research content,
2013. 4
Graph 19: Share of RPOs which have adopted GEPs, 2013. 4
Graph 20: Share of RPOs implementing recruitment and
promotion policies for female researchers, 2013  7
Graph 21: Share of RPOs whose heads were women, 2013. 9
Graph 22: Share of gender-balanced research evaluation
panels in funders, 2013. 10
Graph 23: Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees
for leading researchers in RPOs, 2013  11
Graph 24: Share of funders supporting gender equality in
research and the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content, 2013. 12
Graph 25: Share of RPOs which include the gender
dimension in research content, 2013. 13
Maps
Map 5: Classification of EU Member States according to
measures supporting gender equality and the adoption of GEPs, 2013  5
Map 6: Classification of EU Member States according to
the measures in support of recruitment and their implementation by RPOs, 2013  7
Map 7: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support to improve gender balance in the decision making process and the
share of women who are heads of RPOs, 2013  9
Map 8: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support to the inclusion of gender content in research programmes and
frequent support provided by funders, 2013  12
Map 9: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support to the inclusion of gender contents in research programmes and the
implementation by research performing organisations, 2013  14

In terms of gender equality and gender content in research
3.4.1.         
Gender equality in research
 
 –      Specific national policies on gender equality in public research have been adopted in 17 countries. –      A high share of respondent RPOs implement Gender Equality Plans (GEP) and/or recruitment/promotion policies for female researchers in countries where national laws or strategies for gender equality in public research have been set up. A similar trend/situation cannot be found in the responses of the funders. –       There are still big differences among Member States, funders and RPOs concerning gender balance in decision-making bodies. –      Although the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content and programmes is mentioned by more countries than in 2013, the level of implementation remains insufficiently supported. –      Gender equality and gender dimension in research content has been reinforced in Horizon 2020.  
Gender equality in research is essential
not only because it is fair, but notably because it helps cope with current and
future deficits in skilled labour within the EU. However, in 2011 disparities
remained (see 19).
Graph 1: Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount)
Source: Eurostat
The Commission could identify that 17
Member States have developed gender equality strategies in public research to
various degrees (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, LT, NL, SE,
SI, UK), among which eight countries have specific laws/acts regulating gender
equality in public research (AT, BE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, PL). 
According to the ERA survey 2014 results,
the share of respondent funders which support gender equality frequently in
their research programmes and/or projects was higher in six Member States than
the EU average (82.2%)[1].
Among these, in four cases the Commission could identify measures or strategies
at national level to improve gender equality in public research (DE, NL, SI, UK) (see Graph 2). 
Graph 2: Share
of funders frequently supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion
of gender dimension in research content, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In 22 Member States the share of funders which
frequently support gender equality is below the EU or non-existent. Among
these, in nine cases (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DK, ES, FI, FR, SE) the Commission could
identify measures or strategies to improve gender balance in public research
institutions.
In order to reinforce gender equality, the RPOs
can adopt and implement Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). According to the results
of the ERA survey 2014, 64% of the respondent organisations implement such a
plan[2] (see Graph 3). It should be noted that a large
share of organisations in some countries (up to more than 70% in the case of Croatia) did not provide an answer to this question. In addition there are big differences across
countries. 
Graph 3: Share
of RPOs which have adopted GEPs, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results the share
of RPOs which have adopted GEPs is above the EU average in eight Member States
(AT, DE, FI, FR, MT, NL, SE, UK). Among these, in seven cases the Commission
could identify measures or strategies to improve gender equality in public
research (AT, DE, FI, FR, NL, SE, UK). 
Map 1: Classification
of EU Member States according to measures supporting gender equality and the
adoption of GEPs, 2013
Among the other 20 countries, in ten cases
the Commission could identify supporting provisions (BE, BG, CZ, DK, EE, EL,
ES, HR, LT, SI). In ten other countries (CY, HU, IE, IT, LU, LV, PL, PT, RO, SK) the Commission could not identify any provision. 
In terms of recruitment of female
researchers in public research, the Commission could identify specific support
in the following Member States: AT, BE, DE, DK, EL, ES, HR, NL, SE, UK.  The latter has recently (May 2014) announced a call to action to boost women’s
participation in technology and engineering. 
In terms of implementation of recruitment
and promotion policies for female researchers, according to the ERA survey 2014
results, an average of 59% of respondent RPOs are implementing recruitment and
promotion policies[3].
However, the share of institutions implementing them varies significantly among
countries (see Graph 4). 
Graph 4: Share
of RPOs implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers,
2013 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 2), according to the ERA survey 2014 results,
the share of respondent RPOs which implement recruitment and promotion measures
for female researchers is above the EU average in nine Member States. Among
these, in five cases the Commission could identify specific policies for
recruitment of female researchers at national level (AT, DE, NL, SE, UK).
Map 2:
Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of
recruitment and their implementation by RPOs, 2013
Among the other 19 Member States, where the
share of respondent RPOs supporting the implementation is below the average,
the Commission could identify that in five of them (BE, DK, EL, ES, HR) the
authorities have specific policies for recruiting women researchers. In BG, CY,
CZ, EE, FR, IE, IT, LT, LU, PL, PT, RO, SI and SK, the Commission could not
identify any measures.

3.4.2.         
Gender balance in decision making process

At the level of decision making in public
research institutions, the Commission could identify national initiatives to
improve gender balance in senior positions (AT, BE, DE, DK, HR, NL), quotas (AT,
BE, EL, ES, FR, LU),  targets (AT, DE, DK, EL, ES, FR, HR, IT, SE, SI) and/or awards
(AT, BG, CZ, DE, DK, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI). 
According to the results of the ERA survey 2014
the proportion of organisations whose heads were women is 18% on average, with
strong variations among countries, ranging from 5% in EL to 50% in LU[4] [5] (see Graph 5). 
Graph 5: Share
of RPOs whose heads were women, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 3), according to survey results the share
of organisations with women heads of institutions is above the EU average in almost
half (13) of Member States.
Map 3:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support to improve gender
balance in the decision making process and the share of women who are heads of RPOs,
2013
Among the countries where the share of
institutions headed by a woman  is below the EU average, the Commission could
identify national initiatives for the access of female researchers to senior
positions in BE, DE, DK and NL, but no initiatives in CZ, EL, ES, FR, HU, IE,
IT, LV, PL and PT.
Another important issue is the
participation of the underrepresented sex in evaluation and recruitment panels.
A target of a minimum of 40% for all panels has been agreed. According to the
results of the ERA survey 2014, 35.8% of research evaluation panels include at
least the 40% target of the underrepresented sex in their composition[6]. The share varies
significantly among the responding funders (see Graph 6). 
Graph 6: Share
of gender-balanced research evaluation panels in funders, 2013 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms, the share of gender
balanced evaluation panels in funding is above the EU average in ten Member
States. Respondent funders in three countries (CY, MT, SK) did not identify any
gender balanced evaluation panel, and one Member State (HR) did not provide
information on this issue.
According to the results of the ERA survey
2014, on average 36.6% of recruitment committees of RPOs in the EU respect the
40% target of under-represented balance in their composition (see Graph 7). It should be recalled that these
figures concern RPOs who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000
researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
Graph 7: Share
of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in RPOs, 2013 
Source: ERA survey 2014
 In comparative terms, gender balanced
recruitment committees are above the EU average in nine Countries (ES, HR, IE,
LU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE).
The Commission continues to enforce the
target of 40% of the under-represented sex which is set in evaluation panels
and expert groups. For advisory groups, the target is raised to 50% and each
advisory group includes at least one expert with gender expertise. 

3.4.3.         
Gender dimension in research content/programmes

The consideration of the gender dimension
contributes to improve excellence and pertinence of research. The Commission
could identify that provisions for the inclusion of the gender dimension in
research contents/programmes are in place in ten Member States (AT, DE, DK, ES,
FR, IE, IT, NL, SE, SK). 
According to the ERA survey 2014 results,
funders in only a few countries support the inclusion of the gender dimension
in research content/programmes. In eight countries respondent funders answered
that the gender dimension is frequently integrated in research content[7] (see Graph 8). The share is very high in the case
of IT, which influences the EU average strongly.
Graph 8: Share
of funders supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion of the
gender dimension in research content, 2013 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results the share
of respondent funders supporting the frequent inclusion of gender dimension in
research content/programmes is above the EU average in one Member State.
Map 4:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of
gender content in research programmes and frequent support provided by funders,
2013
Among the rest of the countries, in six
Member States (AT, DE, ES, IE, NL, SE) the Commission could identify measures
supporting the inclusion of the gender dimension included in research content /
programmes.
According to the results of the ERA survey
2014, on average 44% of RPOs which are ERA compliant include the gender
dimension in research content (see Graph 9). The share of institutions doing so
varies significantly among Member States. It should be noted that these figures
concern RPOs who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000
researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
Graph 9: Share
of RPOs which include the gender dimension in research content, 2013 
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 5), according to survey results in almost
half (13) of Member States the share of research performing organisations
including the gender dimension in research content is above the EU average.
Map 5:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of
gender contents in research programmes and the implementation by research
performing organisations, 2013
Among the other countries, where the share
of organisations is below the EU average, eight countries have measures in this
area (AT, DE, DK, IE, FR, IE, NL, SE).

3.4.4.         
Gender equality at EU level 

Gender equality has been reinforced in
Horizon 2020. The Commission is pursuing an effective application of the new
gender equality provisions of Horizon 2020. This means integrating gender
equality issues at each stage of the research cycle, from programming through
implementation, monitoring and programme evaluation. To stimulate applicants’
engagement at proposal level, gender balance in research teams is one of the
ranking factors to prioritise proposals with the same scores. In Horizon 2020,
applicants are invited to describe, where relevant, how sex and/or gender
analysis (i.e. the gender dimension) is taken into account in their project’s
content. The gender dimension is explicitly integrated in more than a hundred
topics across all sections of the Horizon 2020 Work Programmes 2014-2015.
Topics with an explicit gender dimension are flagged, to facilitate their
identification by potential applicants on the H2020 Participant Portal.
The need for institutional change in RPOs
and funders, as well as a reinforced coordination at EU level, has been
highlighted by the Stakeholder platform (see section 3.6) to overcome
differences remaining among Member States concerning gender equality in public
research. To this end, the Commission has organised joint meetings with the
doers’ network “gender” of the Stakeholder platform. Moreover, the Commission
provides financial support to transnational cooperation within the Gender-Net
ERA-Net project. Through specific calls on “Gender Equality in Research and
Innovation” (GERI) of the “Science With and For Society” programme, the
Commission gives financial support to the setting of Gender Equality Plans in
RPOs and funders to improve the participation and career paths of women
researchers and to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes.  
[1] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern funders which
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[2] It should be noted that these figures concern RPOs which answered
the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total
EU researchers).
[3] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern RPOs which
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20%
of total EU researchers).
[4] In Malta, the heads of the three organisations who answered the
survey are men.
[5] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[6] It should be recalled that these figures concern funders who
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[7] It should be noted that these figures concern funders which
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
Facts and Figures
accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014
Contents
3.5.     In terms of circulation of
and access to scientific knowledge. 3
3.5.1.       Open access. 3
3.5.1.       Open innovation (OI) and
knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors  10
3.5.2.       Policies for public
e-infrastructures and associated digital research services  17
Graphs
Graph 26: Share of funders funding open access to
publications, 2013. 3
Graph 27: Share of funders systematically funding open
access to data, 2013. 5
Graph 28: Share of research performing organisations systematically
making available on-line and free of charge [publicly funded] scientific
research data, 2013. 7
Graph 29: Share of funders systematically supporting the
implementation of knowledge transfer as part of their institutional and/or
project based funding, 2013. 10
Graph 30: Share of research performing organisations
having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities, 2013. 13
Graph 31: Share of research performing organisations
having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities, 2013. 14
Graph 32: Share of research and development budget
financed by private sector, 2013. 15
Graph 33: Share of staff employed by RPOs whose primary
occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents), 2013. 16
Graph 34: Share of research performing organisations
providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research
collaboration platform, etc.), 2013. 18
Graph 35: Share of research performing organisations
providing federated electronic identities for their researchers, 2013. 19
Maps
Map 10: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support open access to publications and frequent support provided by
research funding organisations, 2013. 4
Map 11: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support of open access to data and frequent support provided by research
funding organisations, 2013. 6
Map 12: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support of open access to data and the implementation by research
performing organisations, 2013. 8
Map 13: Classification of EU Member States according to
the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and and the support provided by
research funding organisations, 2013. 11
Map 14: Classification of EU Member States according to
the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and the existance of Technology
Transfer Offices in research performing organisations, 2013. 13
Map 15: Classification of EU Member States according to
the support provided to federated identities and their provision by research
performing organisations, 2013. 19

In terms of circulation of and access to scientific knowledge
3.5.1.         
Open access 
 
 –      Open access for publications resulting from publicly funded research is becoming the standard. In Horizon 2020 open-access to peer-reviewed publications is the default setting –      Open access to data may require more frequent financial support from funders - as well as more proactive action by research performers - to increase their importance 
Open access (OA) means unrestricted online
access to peer-reviewed scholarly research. Most Member States (23) have a
similar understanding of the scope and objectives of open access, in line with the
Commission’s definition (AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IE, IT,
LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, UK). The objective of promoting open access
is included in national laws in PL, ES, SE, EE, LT and HU.
The Commission could identify that open access
to publications is supported in AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, IE, IT,
LT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE and the UK, and the implementation is supported by a
working group in BE, BG, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI and IT. In terms of modalities,
both green and gold open access[1]
are supported by AT, DK, EE, EL, FR, HR, IT, PL, PT, SE, UK, green open access
is the main modality in CY, IE, LT and LU, and gold open access in NL and RO.
The Commission is concerned with open
access in its capacities as a policy maker (proposing legislation), a funding
agency (the FP7 and Horizon 2020 framework programmes for research and
innovation) and a capacity builder (through funding of specific projects for
open access infrastructure and policy support actions). The file is shared
between the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation and the
Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology. In
Horizon 2020 the Commission has made open access to peer-reviewed scientific
publications the default setting.  
According to the ERA survey 2014 results,
different attitudes by funders in Member States are observed. In those
situations where open access is supported, the average share of funders supporting
it frequently is 44.6% (see Graph 1). It should be recalled that these
figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent
34% of total EU GBAORD.
Graph 1: Share
of funders funding open access to publications, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results in 13 Member States the share of funders frequently supporting
open access to publications is above the average. 
Map 1: Classification
of EU Member States according to the support open access to publications and frequent
support provided by research funding organisations, 2013
In the other countries the situation
varies: in four Member States (BG, DE, IT, SE) the Commission could identify
measures in support of open access, in one case (SI) the Commission could not
identify policy support. In four cases (CY, HR, RO, SK), the funders which
answered the survey did not declare  any support to open access. 
Concerning open access to data, the
Commission could identify support in DE, EL, ES, IE, IT, PL, PT, RO and the UK. 
According to the results of the ERA survey
2014, funding open access to data is not a common practice in funding
organisations from several Member States[2]
(see Graph 2). Among those
Member States whose funders support it, the average share of funding
organisations frequently supporting it is 28.1%. 
Graph 2: Share
of funders systematically funding open access to data, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 2), according to survey results in seven Member States the share of funders frequently
supporting open access to data is above the average. 
Map 2:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to
data and frequent support provided by research funding organisations, 2013
In the other countries where no frequent
support is provided, the situation varies: in four Member States (DE, ES, IE,
IT) the Commission could identify measures in support of open access to data;
in three cases (AT, CZ, FR) the Commission could not identify policy support,
and in six cases (CY, HR, LV, MT, SI, SK) funders which responded to the survey
declared that they are not providing any support to open access to data. 
According to the ERA survey 2014 results RPOs
in all Member States declared that they make scientific research data available
on-line and free of charge[3]
(see Graph 3). The average
share of organisations which do this frequently is approximately 19.4%. 
Graph 3: Share
of research performing organisations systematically making available on-line
and free of charge [publicly funded] scientific research data, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 3), survey results show that a
combination of policies and willingness by research performing organisations
has induced that in most Member States the share of organisations making their
data available is above the (low) EU share average (19.4%).
Map 3:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to
data and the implementation by research performing organisations, 2013
The Commission committed itself to running
a pilot on open access to research data in Horizon 2020, taking into account
the need to balance openness and protection of scientific information,
commercialisation and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), privacy concerns,
security as well as data management and preservation questions. This open
access to research data pilot concerns selected areas of Horizon 2020 ('core areas').
Projects not covered by the scope of the pilot can participate on an individual
and voluntary project-by-project basis ('opt-in'). Projects may also decide not
to participate in the pilot for several specific reasons ('opt-out'). First
results of the uptake of the pilot in the proposals submitted in the first
calls of Horizon 2020 appear promising. 
The Commission also funds several projects
to support and provide further insights into open access and related issues,
such as RECODE (recommendations on open access to research data), FOSTER
(training and awareness raising), PASTEUR4OA (networking OA actors) and of
course OpenAIRE (infrastructure and national helpdesks). Specific support for
projects participating in the Horizon 2020 pilot on open access to research
data is provided through projects funded in the e-Infrastructure calls of the
Horizon 2020 Research Infrastructures Work Programme 2014-15.
In terms of repositories for open access,
the Commission could identify several modalities in Member States. National
repositories are preferred in EE, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, MT, NL, SI, SK and the UK. The preferred option is institutional repositories in BE, BG, FI, HR, LT, MT, PL, SI. In two Member States (HR, IT) the regional repositories are preferred.

3.5.1.         
Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT)
between public and private sectors
 
 –      Strong policy support (strategies, networking, etc.) in most Member States to Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) but no frequent financial support by funders in half of Member States –      Knowledge transfer offices are present in a (weighted) majority of research performing organisations –      Most Member States encourage strategic partnership with the private sector. However,  the share of funding of public institutions by the private sector is limited –      The Commission has committed to developing a comprehensive policy approach on open innovation and knowledge transfer. The Commission is continuously facilitating and supporting the development and cross-border networking of national knowledge transfer office networks and the work of existing pan-European networks 
Knowledge transfer of research results
contributes to innovation. This explains that most Member States are supporting
knowledge transfer through strategies, incentives, etc. The Commission
identified that supporting modalities vary. In 16 Member States a national
strategy on knowledge transfer is implemented (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, FR,
HR, IE, LT, LU, LV, NL, PL, SE). In most cases, the strategy is accompanied by
specific funding. A national network of knowledge transfer is in place in AT, LV, NL, PL and UK. The professionalization of knowledge transfer activities is supported by
BE, DE, DK, EE, FR, LU, LV, MT, NL, RO and SE. 
According to the ERA Survey 2014 results, funders
in almost all Member States support the implementation of knowledge transfer in
their programmes and/or projects[4]
(see Graph 4). The average
share of funders frequently supporting it in the EU is 69.3%. 
Graph 4: Share
of funders systematically supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer
as part of their institutional and/or project based funding, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results the share
of funders frequently supporting knowledge transfer is above the EU average in eight
Member States.
Map 4:
Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge
transfer strategy and and the support provided by research funding
organisations, 2013
Among those countries where the share of
funders frequently supporting knowledge transfer is below the average, eight Member
States (AT, BE, CZ, DK, FR, LT, PL, SE) have set a strategy whilst in FI, IT  PT
and SI the Commission could not identify a strategy. In SK the funders who
responded to the survey did not indicate any support. 
The Commission has committed to developing
a comprehensive policy approach on open innovation and knowledge transfer. For
this purpose, the Commission established an Expert Group to assess what can be
done to improve knowledge sharing and utilisation. The Expert Group has
delivered a report which offers a new, advanced open innovation paradigm: it
sets out to describe how to build and fund ecosystems for co-creation.
The Commission also carries out studies
with findings contributing to the development of a comprehensive policy
approach to KT and OI. An on-going study is providing support to the
development and implementation of commitment n° 21 of the Innovation Union
addressing collaboration and knowledge transfer. An additional study was
recently launched, with an overall objective to consolidate an EU wide information
base on OI and KT. The results of the studies will help to determine which
additional measures might be needed to ensure an optimal flow of knowledge
between the public research organisations and business, thereby contributing to
the development of the knowledge based economy. 
An indicator that can be used to assess the
degree of attention to knowledge transfer in RPOs is the existence of a
knowledge transfer office. According to the results of the ERA survey 2014 most
research performing organisations (70% on average) have a technology transfer
office[5]
(see Graph 5). 
Graph 5: Share
of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge
transfer activities, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 5), in eight Member States there is a knowledge
transfer strategy and the share of RPOs which have Technology Transfer Offices
(TTOs) is above the EU average. 
Map 5:
Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge
transfer strategy and the existance of Technology Transfer Offices in research
performing organisations, 2013
Among the other cases, in eight countries (AT,
BE, CZ, DK, FR, LT, PL, SE), the Commission could identify the adoption of a
knowledge transfer strategy whilst in FI, IT, PT and SI the Commission could
not identify a knowledge transfer strategy.
Another indicator linked with knowledge
transfer is the presence of dedicated staff to knowledge transfer RPOs. According
to the ERA survey 2014 results, in most Member States more than 50% of the RPOs
have knowledge transfer staff[6]
(see Graph 6). 
Graph 6: Share
of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in
knowledge transfer activities, 2013
 
Source: ERA survey 2014
Partnership of academia with the private
sector is another important factor which contributes to innovation. In 17
Member States, the Commission could identify specific support to strategic
partnership with the private sector (AT, BE, CZ, DE, FI, FR, HR, IT, LT, LU,
MT, NL, PL, RO, SI, SK, UK).
A proxy to measure attractiveness of public
research organisations is the share of research and development budget financed
by the private sector. According to the ERA survey 2014 results, on average,
7.8% of the budget of RPOs originate in the private sector[7] (see Graph 7). The variation across countries is
quite important; half of Member States are below the average. 
Graph 7: Share
of research and development budget financed by private sector, 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
Also, according to the ERA survey 2014 results
a strong variation is observed in terms of staff employed by RPOs whose primary
occupation is in the private sector[8]
(see Graph 8). The average
share of researchers in this category (in FTE) is 2.1%. 
Graph 8: Share
of staff employed by RPOs whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in
Full Time Equivalents), 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
In general the Commission is committed to a
modern and efficient IP infrastructure that supports innovation in all its
stages. In the case of patents, the implementation of the Unitary Patent System
is a clear example in this sense. It will provide innovators and creators – and
hence researchers - with access to broader territorial protection at lower
costs, trigger a reduction of red tape and make it easier for inventors to
access the single market and internationalise their activities. It will fosters
technological transfer, as it will not be necessary anymore to register a patent transfer in each country in which the transaction
needs to have legal effect. In addition, the centralised registration and
publication of unitary patents will make it easier to access patent literature.

In order to gather insight on how to
address some IP related barriers, the Commission set up two Expert Groups.
Expert Group on IP valuation  was created to address the difficulty in
assessing value and in access to funding. To do this, the group looked at which
improvements could be done regarding the evaluation of the economic value of IP
in order to foster IP related transactions and IP based finance. In addition,
an Expert Group on Patent valorisation was created and will look at how to
increase transparency of the IP market, increase awareness of business
opportunities around IP and decrease transaction costs linked to IP
transactions.
The Commission is continuously working with
relevant stakeholder groups to facilitate and support the development and
cross-border networking of national knowledge transfer office networks and the
work of existing pan-European networks. In addition, Horizon 2020 pilots a
Technology Transfer Financing Facility which will co-finance investments made
by existing technology transfer (TT) funds and vehicles. It will focus on TT
undertaken via the creation of new companies and the licensing of intellectual
property, and concentrates on the proof-of-concept, development and early
commercialisation stages of the TT process. Specific calls are also foreseen in
Horizon 2020, for instance on capacity-building on TT encouraging and - where
appropriate - incentivising the more established and experienced funds and TT
offices (TTOs) to share their expertise and best practices with their less
experienced counterparts. The latter will complement Horizon 2020 Technology
Transfer Financing Facility pilot.

3.5.2.         
Policies for public e-infrastructures and
associated digital research services
 
 –      Strong support by the European Commission to enable world-class science based on High Performance Computing, wifi infrastructure and grid infrastructure, federating national initiatives –      More effort is needed to ensure the provision of federated identities 
Europe’s National Research
and Education Networks are specialised Internet service providers dedicated to
supporting the needs of the research and education communities within their own
country. The Commission could identify such national networks in 26 Member
States: AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT,
NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK and the UK. These networks facilitate the
integration of researchers in the countries in the Digital ERA. 
PRACE (Partnership for Advanced Computing
in Europe) has been a key enabler for world-class science based on High
Performance Computing (HPC), awarding, since 2010, more than 8 billion
computing core hours of Tier-0 systems to 303 scientific projects from 38
countries. PRACE has provided training in HPC to 2,700 people in 360 full days
through its PATCs (Advanced Training Centres days) and has held more than 180
events for community building in HPC. Finally, PRACE has also allowed access to
HPC infrastructures to 20 industries (including SMEs) in the first year of its
industrial access programme.
Universities’ and research organisation’s
wifi infrastructure can be accessed through a federated technology called
“eduroam” whose development is supported by GÉANT project (funded by the EC).
This technology allows students and researchers to seamlessly access their IT
infrastructure through wifi using their home organisation’s credentials even in
situations of mobility. This technology is deployed in all MS and AC with an
estimated 200,000 wifi base stations equipped and 21 million accesses per week
(100% growth year/year) including 12% across border access (as of April 2014).
This technology is a key integrator of wifi infrastructures and ensures IT
mobility not only between countries but also inside countries and regions.
The European Grid Infrastructure (EGI) is a
crucial provider of IT resources for science in Europe. Driven by the needs of
the scientific community, it enables sharing of computing power for scientific
purposes between Member States. The EGI federates the National Grid Initiatives
(NGIs), which operate grid infrastructures at country-level. In 2013 the EGI
provided more than 3.7 billion computing core hours (kSI2K) linking 53
countries with more than 300 resource centres and around 430,000 cores.
In terms of provision of digital services
for research and education, TERENA, the Trans-European Research and Education
Networking Association, has identified three main kinds of services: support to
collaboration, cloud services and premium services (these include consultancy
services, security audits, etc.). According to TERENA, the degree of provision
of Digital services varies among Member States: the three kinds of services are
provided by CZ, EE, ES, FR, HU, IE, LT, LU, NL and SI; cloud and collaboration
support by EL, Cloud and premium services by BE and PL, Cloud services in LV, collaboration
support in SE and finally premium services by: DE, DK and PT.
In the survey, RPOs were requested to
indicate the provision of seven types of services. As the combination of
possibilities is quite high, the results of the ERA survey are presented according
to the  number of services provided to researchers. According to the results the
share of institutions not providing any digital services is quite high in many
cases ("No services" in more than 10% of the institutions in BE, BG,
CZ, EE, EL, FR, HR, HU, LU, PL, SI, SK)[9]
(see Graph 9). 
Graph 9: Share
of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e.
cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.), 2013
Source: ERA survey 2014
The provision of federated electronic
identities facilitates the access to digital services by researchers. The
Commission could identify that more than half of Member States are members of
an identity federation: AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, FR, HR, IE, LU, NL, PL, SE,
SI and the UK of which BE and LU in 2013 and that 18 countries are members of
the eduGAIN service, which is intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations: AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR,
HU, IE, LV, NL, PL, SE, SI and the UK, of which EE and AT in 2013.
According to the ERA survey 2014 results, on
average around 43% of the RPOs provide federated identities to their
researchers[10]
(see Graph 10). 
Graph 10: Share
of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities
for their researchers, 2013
 
 Source: ERA survey 2014
In comparative terms (see Map 6), according to survey results RPOs in
more than half (16) of Member States are providing federated identities above
the EU average. 
Map 6:
Classification of EU Member States according to the support provided to
federated identities and their provision by research performing organisations,
2013
Among the rest of the countries, six Member
States (CY, HR, HU, LU, MT, RO) are not yet members of an identity federation
nor of eduGAIN.
[1] Open access publishing (also referred to as 'gold' open access)
means that an article is immediately provided in open access mode as published.
In this model, the payment of publication costs is shifted away from readers,
paying access via subscriptions. The business model most often encountered is
based on one-off payments by authors. These costs (often referred to as Author
Processing Charges, APCs) can usually be borne by the university or research
institute to which the researcher is affiliated, or to the funding agency
supporting the research. In other cases, the costs of open access publishing
are covered by subsidies or other funding models. Green open access implies
that the acceptance of a time lag before making the article available to
potential users.
[2] It should be mentioned that these figures concern funders who
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[3] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing
organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000
researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[4] It should be reminded that these figures concern funders who
answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.
[5] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[6] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[7] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ
515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[8] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[9] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
[10] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research
performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515
000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).
Facts and Figures
accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014
Contents
3.6.     Actions in support of ERA by
the members of the Stakeholder platform.. 3
3.6.1.       Conference of European
Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research (CESAER) 3
3.6.2.       European Association of
Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO) 5
3.6.3.       European University
Association (EUA) 6
3.6.4.       League of European
Research Universities (LERU) 8
3.6.5.       NordForsk. 10
3.6.6.       Science Europe. 11
3.7.     Actions in support of ERA by
the members of EIROforum.. 12
3.7.1.       CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche
Nucléaire) 12
3.7.2.       EMBL (European Molecular
Biology Laboratory) 13
3.7.3.       ESO (European Southern
Observatory) 15
3.7.4.       ESRF (The European
Synchrotron Radiation Facility) 15
4..... Final
remarks. 17
4.6.1.       Progress in policy support
is constantly observed. 17
4.6.2.       ERA national policies lead
to ERA implementation. 18
5..... Annexes. 20
5.6.     Assessment of the ERA
indicators. 20
5.7.     Methodology for clustering
the RPOs (2014 ERA survey) 24
5.8.     The 2014 ERA survey. 24
5.9.     Clustering RPOs according to
ERA compliance. 26
5.10.   Matching ERA policies with ERA
implementation. 31
5.11.   How to analyse the results of
the survey in the country fiches. 34
5.12.   Glossary  38
5.13.   Concepts used in the analysis
of national policy context in support of ERA.. 46
5.14.   Sources of information. 55
5.15.   Results of the survey by
country. 57
Graphs
Graph 36: Representativeness of fs when compared with
national GBAORD 2012. 25
Graph 37: Share of total funding managed by responding
funders, by country. 25
Graph 38: Representativeness of RPOs in terms of total
researchers in the country. 25
Graph 39: Share of country’s researchers among the total
number of researchers in responding RPOs  26
Graph 40: Variables projected onto the first factorial
plane F1-F2. 27
Graph 41: First factorial plane with organisations
identified by size and jointly projected with patents. 27
Graph 42: Number of areas in which policy has been
adopted in the different Member States. 32
Graph 43: Number of areas in which implementation by
Member State is above the EU average. 33
Tables
Table 3: Number of initiatives taken by Member States
since last year’s ERA Progress Report. 17
Table 4: Number of measures adopted (or being adopted) by
area of intervention. 17
Table 5: Score given for each domain of activity to the
policy support and to the implementation by funders or performers. 31
Maps
Map 16: Classification of Member States according to
their policies in support of ERA and their implementation  18

Actions in support of ERA by the members of the Stakeholder platform 

The work of the Stakeholder platform has
evolved since the last ERA Progress Report. The meetings with the heads or
representatives of the research Stakeholders' Organisations have continued, but
several ad hoc “Doers” networks were created to tackle in detail some specific
issues related to ERA. The Doers groups concerned gender, communicating ERA,
joint programming, monitoring, open access, and research infrastructures. Doers
meetings are organised according to the needs and developments of the policy
agendas.
A new partner, the Conference of European
Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research (CESAER), joined the European
Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO), the European University
Association (EUA), the League of European Research Universities (LERU),
NordForsk and Science Europe in the Stakeholder platform in 2013.
The platform has created a new momentum for
joint activities between its participants. The research Stakeholders'
Organisations jointly organise events (such as two fringe sessions in the 2014
Innovation Convention) and regularly participate in each others activities when
relevant to their mandate.
Besides, all participants in the platform
contribute regularly to the ERA newsletter, and they also participate in its
dissemination.
Each research Stakeholders' Organisations is
also very active in raising ERA awareness amongst their member Organisations,
including through strategic discussions around ERA priorities and policy, as
well as in relation to the future direction of ERA. 
In the following sections, some of the
recent activities of each research Stateholders' Organisation which participate
in the Stakeholder platform are presented.

3.6.1.         
Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering
Education and Research (CESAER)

Launching of joint working groups with
partner associations CLUSTER, EuroTech Universities, IDEA League and Nordic
Five Tech on:
·      
“Innovative Doctoral Training” and 
·      
“Institutional Research Strategies and Management
– Professionalisation of Knowledge Transfer”.
Several task forces are in place: 

 “Human Resources”, with priorities on Human Resources
     Strategies for Researchers (HRS4R), recruitment, career development,
     academic leadership, gender, and performance assessment. Papers on the
     different issues are in the pipeline. In print: CESAER Comment on “Open
     Recruitment”, “Leadership and Leadership Development in Academia”.
 “Entrepreneurship”, which is preparing a White Paper on the
     specialty of entrepreneurship at technical universities. 
 “Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)”, which is working
     towards the adoption of RRI policies by CESAER and other relevant parties.
     In September, the Task Force RRI will present comments and recommendations
     for the Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2016-2017. 
 “Open Access – Open Data”, which is preparing a CESAER position
     on Open Access for mid-2014 and guiding material on Open Access for the end
     of 2014.
 “Open Education”, which is in the starting phase.

In terms of monitoring:

 Survey on gender equality at CESAER member institutions. The
     final report will be produced by October 2014; respondents to the survey
     will be convened for a workshop at Vienna University of Technology on
     28-29 November 2014 for discussing the outcomes and possible follow up
     activities.
 Monitoring of the implementation of Charter and Code for
     Researchers and Human Resources Strategies for Researchers.
 Monitoring of the participation in the framework programmes and
     collaborative links between members with a specific focus on “Spreading of
     excellence and widening participation”.
 In-depth web analysis of structures and activities supporting
     knowledge circulation at CESAER member institutions.

Organisation of, or participation in,
events:

 Set up the ERA Partnership Fringe Session in the frame of the
     Innovation Convention, 10 March 2014.
 Participation in the ERAC Mutual Learning Seminar “Open
     Recruitment and Transnational Mobility”, Brussels, 26 March 2014.
 CESAER Conference “Human Resources in Academia”, organised by
     the Task Force “Human Resources, TU Delft, 21-22 May 2014. Parallel
     session in the priority areas of the Task Force. The Conference Report is
     in preparation.

·        
Participation in the JRC Conference “Scientific
Support for the Danube Region”, Vienna, 24-25 June 2014.
·        
Participation in the “Gender Summit 4 - Europe 2014, From Ideas to
Markets”, Brussels, 30 June – 1 July 2014; Speaker: Karel Luyben, President
CESAER.
·        
Participation
in HRS4R Mutual Learning Seminar. Tarragona, Spain; 2-3 October 2014
·        
Workshop “Responsible Research and Innovation”, Tallinn University of Technology, 15 October 2014

 2014 CESAER Seminar “Widening Participation”, Tallinn University of Technology, 16 October 2014.

Other activities:

 CESAER is a member of the 4th Cohort for the Human
     Resource Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) and organises stimulation
     measures towards the implementation in CESAER member institutions.
 Main academic partner in the pilot edition of the Internship
     Programme of the European Institute of Technology Foundation (EITF).
 Contribution to the drafting of the 'Charter for Access to
     Research Infrastructures' in the ERA Monitoring Doers Configuration. 
 With a mandate from CESAER, Paul Jankowitsch (Vienna University of technology) chaired the task force set up for the preparation of the
     Retirement Savings Vehicle for European Research Institutions (RESAVER). 
3.6.2.         
European Association of Research and Technology
Organisations (EARTO)

EARTO currently has 7 active working
groups. Six of them discuss topics related to ERA.  They concern: legal aspects
(improving state aid RDI Framework, General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER)
& Enhanced Programmable Communication Interface (EPCI) schemes to best
achieve ERA objectives); SMEs (best practices on how to best work with SMEs and
national programmes of technology transfer RTOs-SMEs); H2020 (implementation
aspects, including open access and gender balance requirements in H2020
projects); Communication (how to best communicate EARTO members activities on
ERA related topics);  Human Resources (HR managers discussing topics such as
open recruitment, careers and gender balance, pension and doctoral training,
mobility of researchers) and Structural Funds (how to best achieve synergies
between H2020 and EU Structural Funds).
Publications: 
EARTO has published several position papers
in relation to ERA objectives since January 2014:

 ERRIN & EARTO Comments to the Commission Staff Working
     Document "Enabling synergies between European Structural and
     Investment Funds, H2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related
     Union programmes".
 The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Scale as an R&I policy
     tool - EARTO recommendations.
 EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation
     on State Aid for Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI).
 EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation
     on the GBER.
 EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation
     on the EU State Aid Framework for R&D&I.

Conferences:
EARTO and its members organised and
participated in several events on ERA related topics. The key events are:

 EARTO Annual Conference, May 2014, in which 200 participants
     gathered to discuss RTO-business cooperation, focusing on the topic of 'How
     can RTOs support the re-industrialisation in Europe'. 
 EARTO co-organised and participated in two fringe sessions on
     ERA topics at the European Commission Innovation Convention 2014:  'The
     ERA partnership as a backbone of the European innovation eco-system(s)'
     and 'how research partnerships are turning on the Innovation Growth
     Machine in Europe'. 

EARTO members were also very active in the
Gender Summit Europe which took place in June 2014.

3.6.3.         
European University Association (EUA)
 Organisation of the High-level
     conference on 'Mobilising Europe's Universities for Smart Specialisation'
     convened with the S3 Platform and DG REGIO. The objective was to raise
     awareness about the importance of universities' contribution in the
     definition and implementation of RIS3. High-level consultation has been
     initiated by EUA to engage in the essential dialogue with DG REGIO on how
     the Seville Report recommendations can be taken forward in the
     implementation of the European Regional Development Fund and European
     Social Fund (300 participants).
 Publication of a joint report EUA- DG
     REGIO/JRC on 'The role of universities in smart specialisation' (EUA
     Publications, 2014) issuing recommendations to enhance the role of
     universities in the definition and implementation of Smart Specialisation
     Strategies.
 Contribution to the drafting of the
     Charter for Access to RIs within the framework of the MoU Doers Group on
     Research Infrastructures. 
 Preparation with other SHOs of 'high-level'
     talks with major publishing houses to explore 'do-able' business models
     that reflect the impact of digital technological developments on the
     process of producing scientific publishing, as well as operational
     conditions for open access that meet universities’ needs.
 Publication in April 2014 of a
     statement on the proposal for a general Data Protection Regulation,
     highlighting the potential threat to research. 
 Active promotion of best practices of
     university participation in international agreements to foster
     peer-learning and synergy across these international activities through
     the activities of EUA’s Council for Doctoral Education (CDE). In
     particular, promotion of doctoral education/training reforms through its 'Salzburg
     Principles' based on best practice (2005) and revised in 2010. These principles
     form the core of the 'Principles of Innovative Doctoral Training' taken up
     by the European Commission.
 Organisation of the Annual Meeting of
     CDE as a stocktaking exercise of reforms in doctoral education in June
     2013 (over 200 participants).
 Organisation of the upcoming 2nd
     EUA Funding Forum (October 2014) bringing together higher education and
     research stakeholders to discuss funding models and the impact of EU funds
     on university management.

In terms of monitoring and analysis, the
following activities amongst others, can be mentioned:

 Monitoring of trends in public funding
     to the university sector via the EUA Public Funding Observatory (yearly
     release and online tool including data for more than 20 European
     countries).
 EUA 2013 Memorandum of Understanding
     (MoU) questionnaire to universities on development and implementation on policies
     addressing doctoral training, research careers, mobility and gender
     equality. This resulted in an awareness map, the implementation of human
     resources policy awareness and the implementation of 224 European
     Universities. 
 EUA 2013 questionnaire to 34 National
     Rectors’ Conferences (NRCs) on policies at national level regarding
     doctoral education and training, mobility and international cooperation. 
 Publication of a joint report EUA- DG
     REGIO/JRC on 'The role of universities in Smart Specialisation' issuing
     recommendations to enhance the role of universities in the definition and
     implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategies based on the outcome of
     the workshop. 
 Monitoring of national developments in
     open access, particularly regarding implementation of open access
     requirements for H2020 through dialogue with the EUA 34 NRCs. 
 EUA has started analysing data on the
     gender composition of university management based on the database of EUA
     membership (4,250 individual university managers).
 Organisation of the Strategic Global
     Forum for Doctoral Education in March 2013 with 30 leaders in doctoral
     education from across the globe, producing a common statement on the need
     for a balanced global research community. 

Participation in EU funded projects: 

 Study on ways to enhance European
     universities' financial sustainability (EUDIS project: European
     Universities Diversifying Income Streams), awareness-raising and
     capacity-building activities (EUIMA-Full Costing): Sharing
     Innovative Practices in University Modernisation). Through the ongoing
     DEFINE project (Designing Strategies for Efficient Funding of Higher
     Education in Europe) EUA is conducting research and stock-taking exercises
     in order to provide recommendations to policy makers and universities to
     improve the efficiency of the funding to the university sector. More than
     200 universities contributed to these projects.
 Study on collaborative research
     between universities and companies involving all stakeholders
     (EUIMA-Collaborative Research) to identify main factors of success to
     establish and sustain long-term university-business cooperation. On
     supporting mobility between private and public sector, the DOC-CAREERS II
     project (Promoting Collaborative Doctoral Education for Enhanced Career
     Opportunities), explores how universities work with their regional
     industry and authorities across Europe. More than 100 universities
     contributed to these projects.
 'Cooperation on Doctoral Education
     between Africa, Asia, Latin America and Europe' project (CODOC; 2010-2012)
     and 'Framework for the Internationalisation of Doctoral Educatio' project
     (FRINDOC) which monitor developments regarding global collaborations in
     doctoral education through the Erasmus Mundus projects. These projects
     mobilised more than 100 universities.
 Further information on
     EUA's activities in 2013 and 2014 within the framework of the MoU can be
     found here:

 http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Publication/2014_EUA_MoU_report.sflb.ashx.

3.6.4.         
League of European Research Universities (LERU)

Publication of several papers/statements
related to ERA. Among them: 

 Briefing paper for the next EU
     legislature entitled 'An
     ERA of Change';
 Briefing paper 'LERU
     takes concrete steps towards ERA';
 Advice paper entitled 'LERU
     roadmap for research data';
 'LERU
     – Open for business' brochure;
 Advice paper 'Good
     practice elements in doctoral training';
 Advice paper 'Online
     learning at research-intensive universities';
 Support for an exception for TDM in the
     response to the copyright consultation and support given to the report of
     the TDM Expert Group. Open
     letter calling on Elsevier to withdraw its current TDM policy;
 Statement expressing disappointment about
     the EC´s attempts, during the WIPO´s negotiations, to block future
     discussions of copyright law to aid libraries and archives to fulfil their
     missions in the digital environment.

Organisation or participation in several
meetings:

 Fringe sessions on 'How research
     partnerships are turning on the innovation growth machine in Europe' and      'The ERA partnership as the backbone of the European innovation ecosystem'
     at the EC’s 2014 Innovation Convention; 
 Organisation of a seminar on 'Open
     scholarship'; 
 Participation in the EUA seminar on smart
     specialisation;
 Participation in the focus group meeting
     organised by VERA (Forward Vision on the ERA project) to discuss possible
     future scenarios and strategies for ERA;
 Participation in the Working Group IDT
     Principles under the Steering Group for Human Resources and Mobility;
 Organisation of the LERU Doctoral Summer
     School on research integrity in Helsinki;
 Participation in the ERA SHO platform 
     meetings,  in the group developing a European Charter for access to RIs
     and, as an observer,  in the Task Force meetings.

Contribution to the ERA Newsletter
Monitoring:

 Several surveys of LERU members. Among
     them, the survey on ERA priorities in 2013, a survey on the development of
     tenure-track systems, a survey on the classification of researchers and a
     survey on the impact of gender measures in 2014. 

Other activities:

 Since 2013, collaboration with the EIT
     Foundation programme to place graduate students and recent PhDs for
     internships in industry since 2013;
 LERU universities were encouraged to
     publish their vacancies in the Euraxess Jobs Portal. Creation of a LERU
     Community of Vice-Rectors for Enterprise and Innovation in 2013;
 Creation of the LERU legal portal to give
     access to all the legal publications from LERU
     members which are available in open access;
3.6.5.         
NordForsk
 Launching of transnational and jointly
     funded research programmes in fields and topics that are highly relevant
     to society. These programmes are based on open calls, peer review and a
     common-pot principle.
 Adoption of a renewed grant agreement for
     Nordic Centres of Excellence (NCoE), requesting that project results are
     made public as soon as possible and in accordance with the projects’
     publication and dissemination plan. In addition, the new grant agreement
     emphasizes open recruitment and open advertisement of vacancies.
 Emphasis on open access to research data
     in its funding and support to broaden cooperation within all its programmes.

Independent evaluations:

 NordForsk’s cross-border cooperation
     based on common-pot funding: results demonstrate the importance and added
     value of the NCoE funding scheme.
 The Top-level Research Initiative on
     Climate, Energy and the Environment (TRI): preliminary results demonstrate
     that a Nordic platform for successful future cooperation has been created.
 Researcher mobility: results provide a
     basis for understanding patterns and trends of researcher mobility across
     the Nordic region, different types of incentives and obstacles promoting
     and inhibiting such mobility.

Monitoring:

 Monitoring the progress in connection
     with ERA priorities by conducting a survey of the NCoEs funded by the TRI
     in 2013. 

Facilitation activities:

 Creation of a joint research agenda on
     Arctic research in the Nordic countries in 2013.
 Discussion and debate at a global level
     on topics highly relevant to societies.
 Division of tasks and labour in the
     Nordic countries by executing the first call of the Joint Programming
     Initiative, JPI Climate, together with the French agency ANR.
 Discussions on priorities and joint
     Nordic actions by offering a platform for research infrastructure
     cooperation since 2013.
 Assessment of Nordic Universities’
     performance by bibliometric analysis. 
3.6.6.         
Science Europe
 Adoption of the Science Europe Roadmap in
     December 2013. The roadmap sets out Science Europe’s strategic priorities
     on a number of key ERA-related topics. The roadmap provides Science Europe
     with a plan and methodology to make evidence-based contributions to the
     strengthening of European research systems. 
 Launch of nine Science Europe working
     groups: Cross-border Collaboration; Open Access to Research Publications;
     Research Data; Research Careers; Research Infrastructures; Research
     Integrity; Research Policy and Programme Evaluation; Gender and Diversity;
     and H2020. Work plans have been, or are being, developed, and work is already
     underway. Priority areas for 2014 include, but are not limited to: safe
     havens for data;, inter-sectoral mobility; post-doctoral instruments;
     strategic priority setting for RIs; research integrity policies and
     awareness raising tools. These activities are complemented by the work of
     the six Scientific Committees, for example work by the Medical Sciences
     Committee on ‘big data’, and the Humanities Committee Opinion Paper, ‘Open
     Access Opportunities for the Humanities’.
 Organisation of the sixth high-level ERA
     workshop, which took place in February 2014. This brought together Heads
     of Science Europe Member Organisations, ministerial representatives and EU
     institutions, as well as representatives of stakeholder partner
     organisations. This event provided an important platform for high-level
     dialogue on ERA-related topics and will continue to take place annually.
 Co-ordination, together with ANR, the
     French National Research Agency, of the European regional input into the
     2014 meeting of the Global Research Council (GRC). This led to a state of
     play report on Open Access and a ‘Statement of Principles for Shaping the
     Future: Supporting the Next Generation of Researchers’, which was endorsed
     by the GRC. 
 Publication of the ‘Practical Guide to
     Three Approaches to Cross-border Collaboration’. This guide provides
     information and advice on three optional models of collaboration: MfR;
     Money follows Co-operation Line and Lead Agency Procedure. It is intended
     to support Member Organisations which wish to implement these models.
 Production, in collaboration with
     Elsevier’s SciVal Analytics, of the report ‘Comparative Benchmarking of
     European and US Research Collaboration and Researcher Mobility’. The
     report looks at the impact of international research collaboration in
     Europe and the US. It shows that – measured in co-authorship – cross-border
     research collaboration levels in Europe are comparable to collaboration
     levels across US state borders. It also shows that there is a big
     advantage to be gained for European researchers who collaborate with
     non-European colleagues. The report was published in September 2013 and
     contributes to the evidence base on the topic of cross-border
     collaboration.
 Invitation to Science Europe Member
     Organisations to sign a new ‘Letter of Intent’ to indicate their intention
     to implement MfR (a model of grant portability), if this is relevant to
     them. All institutions signing up to this commit to providing
     publicly-available information on how this is organised in their
     institution, thus improving the transparency and visibility of MfR. 
 Facilitation of Member Organisations’
     input into the consultation on the EU Copyright Directive. Also,
     continuation of advocacy of Science Europe’s position on the European Data
     Protection Regulation. Science Europe is also working, in collaboration
     with partners where appropriate, on the related topics of data and text
     mining, licensing and copyright and data protection. On the last of these,
     SE released a Position Statement in May 2013 on the proposed European Data
     Protection Regulation, calling on the EU to safeguard the needs of the
     scientific community. This was complemented by an Opinion Paper by the SE
     Medical Sciences Committee: ‘The Benefits of Personal Data Processing for
     Medical Sciences in the Context of Protection of Patient Privacy and
     Safety’, which was followed up by a co-hosted roundtable event in the
     European Parliament in September 2013. 
3.7.       
Actions in support of ERA by the members of
EIROforum 

Four of the EIROforum members reported
actions in support of the implementation of the ERA actions.

3.7.1.         
 CERN (Conseil Européen pour
la Recherche Nucléaire)

During 2013 CERN contributed to the
implementation of all five ERA priorities as identified in the 2012
Communication on completing the ERA:
More effective national research systems
•           In May 2013 CERN Council
adopted the updated European Strategy for Particle Physics, which summarises
the priorities for Europe in the next decade and is being used as a reference
roadmap for particle physics by national funding agencies and by ESFRI.
Optimal co-operation and effective
investment and use of RIs
•           Israel became the 21st full
member of CERN in January 2014; 
•           The High-Luminosity Upgrade of
the LHC is currently in the implementation phase, with contributions from USA, Russia and Japan;
•           CERN provides free access to
its research facilities for scientists from more than 80 nations, involved in
one or more of the many experiments using the accelerator infrastructure of the
Organisation.
Open labour market for researchers
•           CERN is working towards
obtaining and implementing the EC logo 'HR excellence”; 
•           Vacancy notices for all staff
positions at CERN, not just Marie Curie fellows, are published on the EURAXESS
job portal;
•           CERN has an open and merit
based recruitment process (e.g. no national quotas) and a career development
system;
•           Positions for Marie-Curie
fellows (ITN and CO-FUND) are open to candidates from any country in the world;
•           CERN fellows with a Marie-Curie
CO-FUND fellowship may spend up to one year (out of three) in a research
institute, university or industrial company of their choice, which facilitates
the transition to the next stage of their careers;
•           CERN actively contributes to
the Task Force on the establishment of a Pan-European Pension Fund for
researchers. 
Gender equality and gender mainstreaming
in research
•           The Management of CERN is
encouraging institutional changes through the introduction of a diversity
programme and discussions on different levels within the Organisation.
Optimal circulation, access to and
transfer of scientific knowledge
•           CERN plays a leading role in
the ongoing implementation of open access for publications in particle physics
through the SCOAP3 Open Access publishing initiative, http://scoap3.org/;   
•           CERN continued the development
and transfer of digital library technology, as well as Open Access experience,
through the FP7 OpenAIREPlus project, notably with the launch of the flagship
Zenodo Open Access and Open Data repository. The Open Access pilot in FP7,
supported by OpenAIRPlus is expected to be expanded in H2020, with CERN expected
to continue to provide the baseline digital Open Access technology; 
•           The Organisation supports the
promotion of knowledge and technology transfer, including via open source
software and open hardware models.

3.7.2.         
  EMBL (European
Molecular Biology Laboratory)

More effective national research systems
•           In 2013 the Nordic EMBL
Partnership for Molecular Medicine, which had until then connected institutes
of excellence in Norway, Finland and Sweden, was expanded to Denmark. Thus, the EMBL partnership network now comprises national institutes within nine
countries and thereby contributes to more effective national systems in life
science research;
•           To strengthen research links
with institutes in its Member States, in 2013 EMBL entered into several
agreements envisaging scientific exchange and collaboration. Recognising the
potential for synergism in the field of structural biology, EMBL formalised its
scientific links with the Karolinska Institutet, Sweden. Collaboration with the
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, aims to address the scientific
opportunities and challenges in the application of structural biology to
understand certain human diseases. Last but not least, agreement with the Fonds
National de la Recherche Luxembourg will support research projects of the
highest quality put forward jointly by Luxemburgish and EMBL researchers. 
Optimal co-operation and effective
investment and use of RIs
•           EMBL is contributing towards
cooperation and effective investment and use of RIs across the ERA by expanding
its membership. In 2013 the EMBL Council endorsed the membership of the Czech Republic. In 2013 Malta also submitted an application to become an EMBL Member State. This will be on the agenda of the EMBL Council in summer 2014;
•           In 2013 the EMBL Council
adopted a policy on prospect membership to facilitate the integration of the
molecular biology community in Europe. The aim of the policy is to attract
countries from Central and Eastern Europe to join EMBL and thereby encourage
better integration of life science research in Europe. Prospect membership of
EMBL is of a transitional character and offers broad access to EMBL facilities
and services with no financial cost. This policy was welcomed by several
European countries and in February 2014 the Slovak Republic became the first
EMBL prospect Member State;
•           In 2013 EMBL revised its
associate membership scheme to further foster the development of mutually
beneficial research cooperation activities with non-European states. As a
result, in 2013 the EMBL Council approved an application from Argentina to become an associate Member State. Australia has been an EMBL associate Member State since 2008; 
•           Progress in coordinating
national investment in RIs has also been noticeable in ELIXIR and Euro-BioImaging.
In 2013 ELIXIR moved into its implementation phase following the entry into
force of the ELIXIR Consortium Agreement, which has since been signed by nine
European countries and EMBL. In 2013 Euro-BioImaging presented a MoU which is a
first formal step towards establishing this RI. Thus far the Memorandum has
been signed by eleven countries and EMBL.
Open labour market for researchers
•           In 2013 EMBL was conferred with
the EC’s 'Excellence in research' logo in recognition of its progress in
implementing the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for
Recruitment of Researchers. EMBL developed a strategy and an action plan, which
incorporates the C&C;
•           EMBL has remained committed to
advertising vacancies on EURAXESS, implementing a merit based recruitment
process, launching career development initiatives etc. 
Gender equality and gender mainstreaming
in research
•           During 2013 EMBL management
encouraged institutional change through actions of different working groups and
discussions on gender equality at different levels within the organisation. An
example of one such action was the guidelines drawn up to ensure applications
from suitable female candidates during the recruitment of group leaders.
Optimal circulation, access to and
transfer of scientific knowledge
•           EMBL continuously implements
open access (a case in point are the bioinformatics services), provides digital
research services and encourages different initiatives with the industry. In
addition, Europe PubMed Central, maintained at EMBL-EBI and supported by more
than 20 funding organisations, provides free access to life sciences and
biomedical research publication information, to enable innovation through use
of literature, including text mining, and to facilitate and provide integration
of related research data; 
•           EMBL encourages knowledge
transfer via its own technology transfer company. 

3.7.3.         
ESO (European Southern Observatory)

More effective national research systems
•           Continuation of ESO’s
Scientific Instrumentation devolution policies based on a consortia of national
institutes (often in different countries) developing advanced scientific
instrumentation for ESO’s observational facilities;
•           Continual discussions with a
number of countries in Europe and beyond with an interest in joining the
organisation;
•           Providing help (expertise) to
non-ESO ESFRI projects; 
•           Establishment of an ESO Council
strategy working group to elaborate ESO’s role in the wider astronomy and
astrophysics landscape in Europe and beyond, including structural relations
with major non-ESO undertakings.
An open labour market for researchers
•           Open merit based and
transparent recruitment: already in place, a review of the recruitment process
and tool took place to facilitate applications of PhD candidates, fellows and researchers;
•           Other areas (competence
framework, performance evaluation for researchers, career development and
specific training) are now integrated into the ESO Fellowship programme, etc.
and will be implemented in 2014.
Gender equality and gender mainstreaming
in research
•           Encouraging institutional
change through presentations, working groups and discussions at different
levels within the organisation;
•           Giving priority to gender
equality in the recruitment process, in particular for researchers and
engineers;
•           Follow-up on gender issues
identified in our staff engagement survey;
•           Focus on gender issues in our
regular review of employment conditions  (maternity leave, parental leave,
Kinderkrippe/Kindergarden, part time/flexible working time, etc.). 

3.7.4.         
ESRF (The European Synchrotron Radiation
Facility)

More effective national research systems
The ESRF is the only international
synchrotron in the world. Most of the contracting parties of the ESRF also have
their own national synchrotron facilities, complementary to the ESRF, which
continually benefit from the experience and expertise of the ESRF via numerous
collaborations.  
Optimal co-operation and effective
investment and use of RIs
In May 2013, South Africa signed a
medium-term arrangement with the ESRF becoming the 20th country to join the
European synchrotron. In August 2013, Israel renewed its Scientific Association
with the ESRF for a further 5 year period (2014-2018) with an increased level
of financial contribution.
In 2013, the ESRF published a detailed
report on the socio-economic impact of the ESRF – 'Impact of the ESRF and its
Upgrade Programme'.[1]
Phase I of the ESRF Upgrade Programme
(2009-2015), representing an investment of EU 165 million, paves the way to a
new generation of beam lines and the substantial improvement of the
reliability, stability and brilliance of the synchrotron source and X‐ray instruments. It is now close to completion and is being
delivered on time and within budget. The second phase of the ESRF Upgrade
Programme (UP Phase II) is currently being elaborated with users, external
experts and the ESRF funding bodies. ESRF UP Phase II represents EUR 150 million
of new investment during 2015-2020 centred on an enhanced X-ray source that
reduces the horizontal spread or 'emittance' of the ESRF’s beams to
unprecedented low values. The implementation of Phase II will allow Europe to maintain leadership in synchrotron research for the foreseeable future by
enabling new science and the development of new technologies to the benefit of
our society.
An open labour market for researchers
The ESRF advertises its open positions
widely and continues to use the EURAXESS portal for this purpose. It accepts
applications from candidates of all nationalities.
Gender equality and gender mainstreaming
in research
In September 2012 the ESRF Management and
Unions signed an agreement on gender equality. This agreement has been fully
implemented and provides, for example, and amongst others:
•           the yearly production of
statistics on gender balance (e.g. ensure that the proportion of male/female
new recruits reflects as closely as possible the respective proportion present
in the applications received);
•           that at least one woman is
present on recruitment panels;
•           that in the case where a male
candidate is preferred for a position for which there were also female
candidates, a written argumentation be made in the final recruitment proposal
to management, providing the reasons, based on objective and neutral criteria,
for the choice of that candidate.

4.         
Final remarks
4.6.1.         
Progress in policy support is constantly
observed

The Commission could
identify, together with Member States, that a variety of actions have been
taken since 2013. Error! Reference source not found. below
summarises the type of overall actions in the EU.
Table 1: Number
of initiatives taken by Member States since last year’s ERA Progress Report.
 Type of initiative || Since 2013 || Of which in 2014 
 Law || 33 || 10 
 Plans (including Action Plans) || 14 || 5 
 Programme (incl. funding programme) || 49 || 19 
 Schemes || 11 ||   
 Non-legal action || 12 || 1 
 Strategies || 60 || 25 
 Other type || 44 || 6 
The areas where more measures could be
identified are, by order of importance 'knowledge transfer and open innovation',
'open access', 'competitive funding' and 'financial commitments for the
construction and operation of ESFRI'. The number of measures identified in 2014
is still low (see Table 2).
Table 2: Number of measures adopted (or being
adopted) by area of intervention
   || Since 2013 || Of which in 2014 
 Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review || 23 || 3 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment || 18 || 5 
 Implement joint research agendas || 9 || 8 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes || 9 || 5 
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions || 2 || 2 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional RIs of pan-European interest || 23 || 5 
 Access to RIs of pan-European interest || 4 || 3 
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender || 3 ||   
 Gender balance in decision making process || 19 || 5 
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research || 24 || 8 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors || 48 || 7 
 Uptake of federated electronic identities || 3 || 1 

4.6.2.         
ERA national policies lead to ERA implementation

Some of the results[2] presented in this report are summarised in Map 1[3]. It shows that overall ERA is well implemented. 
Map 1:
Classification of Member States according to their policies in support of ERA
and their implementation
Source: DG RTD
The results also suggest that there is not
a single path to ERA. The implementation of ERA above the EU average is in some
cases directly driven by funders and RPOs (bottom-up), whilst in some other
cases by national and regional policies (top-down). In the cases where in
implementation is below the EU average, further efforts seem to be required by
RPOs and in some cases also by national and/or regional authorities.  

5.         
Annexes
5.6.       
Assessment of the ERA indicators


5.7.       
Methodology for clustering the RPOs (2014 ERA
survey)

This section presents the characteristics
of the ERA survey and the methodology used to cluster RPOs according to their
ERA compliance.

5.8.       
The 2014 ERA survey

The second ERA survey is the continuation
of the first survey of RPOs in the ERA launched in 2012, to identify the
implementation status of the different ERA priorities. Only public research
organisations (universities, institutes, hospitals, research agencies, etc.) or
organisations under private law with a public mission were concerned.
The 2014 questionnaire was drafted by an
Expert Group taking advantage of the experience acquired in the previous
exercise as well as contributions from national representatives. The resulting
2014 questionnaire is a simplified version of the previous one and mainly gathers
information to estimate indicators agreed with Member States. It also
introduces the possibility of answering 'not applicable' to the questions to
reflect the fact that sometimes they cannot implement the ERA actions because
they do not correspond to their mandate or institutional characteristics. A new
organisation category, Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs), with
distinctive, mission-oriented R&D objectives, was also included. The
questionnaire was administered on-line through a dedicated webpage created on
the European Commission ERA website. Launched on 28 February 2014, it was
closed on 9 April 2014. In many cases the organisations were contacted after
the closure to validate some of the information provided. 
The survey addresses specific issues linked
to the ERA priorities: institutional assessment for funding; RIs, open labour
market for researchers; gender issues and knowledge circulation. Questions
regarding transnational co-operations with EU countries were not considered in
the 2014 survey in order to reduce the response burden. Therefore, a
quantitative and statistical comparison with the results of the first survey
cannot be carried out. However, a qualitative study based on some common items
is possible.
The Commission received 1,265 responses by
RPOs in 2014 (this number is not far from the 1,374 received in 2013 after
removal of duplicates, incomplete, wrong and unreliable records). The
representativeness of the data is estimated to be 31.6% when considering the
total number of staff (headcount) of the research organisations at EU level (it
was equal to 31.2% in the 2012 survey). However, only around one third (471) of
the RPO responded to both surveys.
The data was collected in textual or
numerical format, transformed and recoded into a numeric format to be analysed
with statistical software packages. 
In terms of the geographical distribution
of RPO respondents in 2014, it appears that some countries participated better than
in 2012 (the most notable being Germany, Austria and Estonia) while it was the
opposite in the case of Poland, Belgium, Italy. However, for most of the
countries, these numbers remain quite stable (although, as mentioned above,
they may be not the same organisations). Among the ACs, a high number of
responses were received from Turkey.
In terms of representativeness of the
answers from funders, their total budget represents around 34% of total GBAORD
in the EU (see Graph 1).
However, the analysis by country shows figures above 100% of GBAORD. This is
explained by the fact that the figures provided also include the budgets
dedicated to education. 
Graph 1: Representativeness of fs when compared with national GBAORD 2012.
 
Source: Eurostat (GBAORD) and ERA survey
2014 (Research funders budget)
The importance of funding managed by national
funders among all funders who responded to the survey is shown in Graph 2. The high level of funding managed by
German funders affects the estimation of EU averages. Besides, the table shows
the limited participation in the total budget of the four cases which declared
budgets above the 100% of GBOARD.
Graph 2: Share of total funding managed by responding funders, by country
It should be noted that the denominators
used for the estimation of the EU averages include (very limited) amounts of
funding dedicated to education.
Concerning RPOs, respondents to the survey
gather around 20% of the total research population in the EU. Graph 3 shows the important share of
researchers in the case of France and Germany.
Graph 3: Representativeness of RPOs in terms of total researchers in the
country
The representativeness of the survey in
terms of share of national researchers is important in Germany, France, Spain
and Italy, which affects the EU average (notably by the German institutions)
(see Graph 4).
Graph 4: Share of country’s researchers among the total number of researchers
in responding RPOs 

5.9.       
Clustering RPOs according to ERA compliance

The responses to the survey can be used to
group the organisations according to their different propensity towards the
implementation of ERA actions. One possible methodology is to undertake a
multivariate analysis. This type of statistical analysis enables the
simultaneous representation of the variables and/or the cases of a dataset in
order to synthesize the information (aka, the variance) of the sample (Di
Franco 2001, 181). Usually, multivariate analysis requires an adequate number
of variables (at least 3, but more than 4 are generally recommended) and cases
(many suggest at least 20 cases per variables), otherwise results might not be
statistically significant. Considering the objective of the analysis goal and
the categorical and ordinal nature of the majority of the variables in the
dataset, the 'French way' to conduct multivariate analysis (Benzecrì, 1973; Di
Franco, 2006; Greenacre & Blasius, 2006; Holmes, 2007), was adopted. The 
most common procedure of this approach consists of two multivariate techniques
applied in sequence: first an MCA (multiple correspondence analysis, similar to
a factor analysis, but applied to categorical data) to synthesize many
variables into single factors; then  a clustering method in order to group the
cases according to MCA outcomes.
The responses to the survey were used to
carry out basic univariate statistics. Variables with too many missing values,
too high redundancy or unbalanced distributions were excluded from the
analysis. Those remaining were used for a descriptive multidimensional (i.e.
multivariate) analysis using factorial and clustering methods to group the
organisations according to their propensity towards the implementation of the
ERA actions. The variables retained are: Funding based on assessment by the
funding organisation, Running and/or funding RIs; Research vacancies advertised
on Euraxess; Minimum requirements for recruitment included in the vacancies
announcement; adoption of the C&C principles; Adoption of innovative
doctoral training principles; Adoption of GEP; Inclusion of gender dimension in
research content; Open access for data; Presence of a structure for knowledge
transfer activities; Provision of federated electronic identity; Provision of cloud
services, Provision of other digital research services; Number of publications
per researcher.
The main results of the multivariate
analysis are: 

 The first factorial plane in Graph 5 shows how the variables (issued from
     the questions) contribute to the factor formation. The most informative
     parts in this plane are the lower-half and the right-half regions (the
     left-half corresponding mainly to organisations replying 'not applicable').

Graph 5: Variables projected onto the first factorial plane F1-F2 
NB: Dots represent organisations

 As depicted in the first factorial plane, through
     clustering techniques three clusters can be identified. They are labelled
     as: 'Limited compliance to ERA' (Cluster 1, in Graph 6); 'ERA compliance' (cluster 2);
     'Not applicable” (cluster 3). 

Graph 6: First
factorial plane with organisations identified by size and jointly projected
with patents.
NB: The circles represent positions of the centres of
mass of the clusters. Their sizes are proportional to the cardinals of each
cluster.
It should be noted that the inclusion of an organisation
in a cluster does not necessarily mean that it fits the 'expected' profile of
the cluster perfectly, i.e. if an organisation is included in the 'ERA
compliance' cluster, it does not mean that this organisation fully implements
all the ERA priorities. Its inclusion in the 'ERA compliance' cluster means
that this organisation has a similar pattern of answers to other organisations
which show a high propensity towards ERA. The same applies for the other
clusters.
Cluster 1, labelled 'Limited compliance to ERA', gathers
565 organisations which show a limited propensity towards the implementation of
ERA. Their implementation (occasionally) appears to be confined to few ERA
actions. From a statistical point of view, this cluster is characterised by low
percentages of organisations implementing some actions such as: occasional
implementation of 'advertising on Euraxess' (6.9% of the organisations
belonging to this cluster); 'C&C principles' (9.6%); 'GEP' and 'inclusion
of gender dimension' (about 20% when averaging the two corresponding scores); a
moderately better situation regarding 'funding based on assessment' (36.5%); 'minimum
requirements in vacancy announcements' (44.2%); 'existence of a structure for
knowledge transfer' (30.4%); 'provision of federated electronic identity'; 'provision
of cloud services'. The proportion of 'not available' responses for 'innovative
doctoral training' is high (45.3% of organisations in the cluster). 
                                                    
Cluster 2, called 'ERA compliance', gathers 501 organisations
which appear to be more inclined to implement ERA actions. The profile of an 'ERA
compliant' organisation is characterised by the implementation (often
frequently) of the majority of the variables used for the cluster analysis.
From a statistical point of view, this cluster can be described by: a large
majority (about or more than 80%) of organisations replying 'yes' or 'frequently'
to the effective implementation on 'minimal requirements for researcher’s
recruitment', 'structure for knowledge transfer'; a rather high percentage
(about 2/3 or higher) for 'funding based on assessment', 'running/funding RIs',
'implementation of the C&C principles', 'adoption of GEP', adoption of innovative
doctoral training principles'; a mixed picture for 'vacancies advertised on
Euraxess' (50.7%), 'inclusion of gender dimension in research contents'
(47.7%), 'provision of federated electronic identity' (55.3%), 'provision of other
digital services' (48.1%); a modest performance for 'open access for data' (27.5%)
and 'provision of cloud services' (38.9%).
Cluster 3, called 'ERA not applicable', gathers 199
organisations. This cluster is the most difficult to describe because the
organisations which indicated that the implementation of ERA is 'not applicable'
according to their mandate. In other words, the organisations belonging to this
cluster do not find an appropriate answer to the majority of the questions. The
statistical analysis shows that, most often, the answer 'not applicable'
represents the higher percentage of responses such as 'advertised on Euraxess',
'minimum requirements included in the vacancy announcement', 'implementation of
the C&C principles, 'adoption of GEP'; however, for some questions the 'not
available' percentage of responses is the highest, such as 'adoption of
innovative doctoral training principles' (59.3%) and 'provision of federated
electronic identity' (44.2%). 
Although the cardinal (i.e. the number of organisations)
of the cluster 'Limited compliance to ERA' (565) is slightly higher than the
one of 'ERA compliance' (501), the latter represents 80.6% of the total number
of researchers, while the former only 16.5%. The 'not applicable' cluster
gathers the remaining 2.9%.
The RTOs and 'others' represent respectively 179 and 214
organisations. If the RTOs show a relatively balanced distribution in the two
above clusters (keeping the same order of presentation 81 and 65), the 'other'
category is mainly concentrated in the 'Limited compliance to ERA' cluster
(114) and very few (26) in the 'ERA compliance' cluster. Hospitals, museums,
libraries are included in the 'other' category of respondents. 
The size of the organisations is an important factor
regarding the extent to which they are actively engaged in adopting and
implementing ERA actions; larger organisations in the sample appear to be more
compliant. High ratios are observed for instance regarding the 'funding based
on assessment by the funding organisation' for universities larger than 1000:
97 responding 'yes' in the cluster 'ERA compliance' out of a total of 108. For 'running
and/or funding RIs', while the 'yes' is balanced between the two clusters 'Limited
compliance to ERA' and 'ERA compliance' (21 and 22 respectively) for research
organisations less than 100, these values are very different (respectively 20
against 76) when the size is bigger than 100. The same figures are observed for
'advertised on Euraxess': they are even more pronounced with 99 responses 'frequently'
out of a total of 105 for universities larger than 1000. 
It should be stressed that the three clusters do not discriminate
against organisations according to 'positive' and 'negative' implementation of
the ERA actions. There are always organisations that respond negatively or
positively in each cluster. For instance, 44.2% of the organisations in 'Limited
compliance to ERA' replied 'frequently' to the question on minimal requirements
(to be compared however to the 85.6% of the 'ERA compliance' cluster). The same
observation can be made for innovative doctoral training where implementation
is respectively undertaken by 28.7% and 73.1% of the organisations. In terms of
adoption of a gender equality plan 18.9% of the organisations in the 'Limited
compliance to ERA' cluster answered 'yes' while 75.2% replied 'no' (62.1% and
30.5% respectively in the 'ERA compliance' cluster). In other words, the
clusters show a trend more toward ERA implementation than a strict frontier
between the two groups. This is also true for the 'not applicable' cluster,
although at a much lower level.
Regarding the distribution per country, it appears that the
number of organisations in the 'Limited compliance to ERA' surpass the 'ERA
compliance' in the majority of countries. Half or almost half of organisations
belonging to countries such as Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Ireland and Slovakia are clustered in the 'Limited compliance to ERA'. The
countries whose majority of organisations belong to the 'ERA compliance'
cluster are, amongst others, Italy, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Norway and Switzerland. The only country where there is a large difference is Germany: 83 organisations out of127 are classified in the 'ERA compliance' cluster (10
being in the 'Not applicable' cluster). However, the situation changes radically
when the analysis is done with respect to the number of researchers in the
organisations. In this case, only four countries have a majority of
organisations in the 'ERA compliance' cluster. 

5.10.   
Matching ERA policies with ERA implementation

In order to provide a synthetic view of the
previous analysis and reflect the overall ERA compliance, policy and
implementation indexes were built up. In situations where policy for the ERA
priority was identified, the country was given a mark of one, whereas, when
policies were not identified, the country was given a mark of zero. In
situations where the implementation of the ERA action is above the EU average,
the country was given a mark of one, and vice versa, when the implementation
was below the EU average, the country was given a mark of zero. 
Table 3 presents
the ERA areas which were considered in this assessment. The domains related
with the open labour market for researchers are not included as the analysis is
presented in the relevant section of this report. 
For example, a country in which there is a
strategy in place to support the implementation of a joint research agenda and
the share of funding to joint research agendas is above the EU average, the
country received a mark of 1 in terms of policy support and 1 in terms of
implementation. In cases where there is no strategy but the share of funding is
above the EU average, the country received a mark of 0 and 1, respectively.
Table 3: Score given for each domain of activity
to the policy support and to the implementation by funders or performers
For each country, the total scores are
added up, independently of the fact that there is a matching between policy and
implementation. 
The following graphs compare the situation
across Member States. Eight Member States have adopted policies in more than of
the 10 areas mentioned above (see Graph 7). 
Graph 7: Number
of areas in which policy has been adopted in the different Member States.
Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit
Note: Results on the open labour market for
researchers are not included in this graph.
The number of areas where implementation is
above the EU average is lower than in the previous case. For example, only in
three countries (and they are not always the same) it can be observed an
implementation above the EU average in ten 10 areas (see Graph 8).
Graph 8: Number of areas in which implementation
by Member State is above the EU average.

5.11.   
How to analyse the results of the survey in the
country fiches

Annex 5.1 presents the indicators that were
agreed with Member States. Among the list, 35 are being included either in the
Country snapshot or in the relevant section in the Country fiches. 
The results in the current version are
presented in the form of tables with the following headings:
 Indicator || Level/ cluster || Value || Year || Source 
The level/cluster column indicates the
following possibilities:

 For the case of funders, there are two
     values: National (the result observed at national level) and EU (the
     result observed in the average at EU level). 
 For the case of RPOs, there are up to four values:
     the results observed at national level, presented according to the degree
     of ERA compliance of RPOs (ERA compliant, Limited Compliance and ERA not
     applicable) and the result observed at EU level only for the cluster 'ERA
     compliant' (it can be recognised by the title 'ERA compliant at EU level'.

In the publishable version of the report, the results
will be presented in a graphic format.
For the snapshots, the following indicators where
retained:
 Indicator || Rationale 
 GBAORD || Government budget appropriations or outlays on R&D (GBAORD) are all appropriations allocated to R&D in central government or federal budgets and therefore refer to budget provisions, not to actual expenditure. Provincial or state government should be included when its contribution is significant. GBAORD measures government direct support to R&D activities. 
 GBAORD per capita || The indicator presents Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays on R&D normalised by population in order to allow for the comparison of spending efforts related to the population of a country. 
 GBAORD/GDP || The indicator GBAORD as a % of GDP shows how much priority government gives to the public funding of R&D in the economy. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || The indicator GBAORD as a % of total government expenditure shows how much priority government places on the public funding of R&D. 
 R&D tax incentives (as a share of GBAORD) || Tax incentives for R&D are a form of indirect support for R&D. It is a market-based tool aimed at reducing the marginal cost of R&D activities. It reflects the willingness of a government to give up revenues in the short-term in order to foster R&D in the private sector. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project funding || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD allocated to a group or an individual to perform a R&D activity limited in scope, budget and time, normally on the basis of the submission of a project proposal describing the research activities to be done. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD which is allocated to institutions with no direct selection of R&D project or programmes to be performed. Under this type of funding, it is the receiving institution that has discretion over the R&D projects that are to be performed, not the funding organisation. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD which is allocated to transnational cooperation activities. It includes the contributions to transnational public R&D performers; Europe-wide transnational public R&D programmes and bilateral or multilateral public R&D programmes established directly between Member State governments. It reflects the importance given by the government to collaboration and sharing of experiences in R&D across borders, whether national, regional or organisational, as an effective way to access new ideas, innovative approaches and new skills. 
 Number of researchers (headcount) || Researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems and also in the management of the projects concerned. Head count data corresponds to the total number of researchers employed by the public and private sectors. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (headcount) || The indicator presents the total number of researchers as a share of active population. 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a percentage of all doctorate students || This indicator presents the share of non-EU doctorate students among all doctoral students measure in headcounts at a particular point in time. It reflects the openness of the education system to students from outside the EU. 
 Share of women researchers (headcount) || It addresses gender balance among researchers. 
 Share of women PhD graduates (% based on headcount) || It presents gender balance after PhD graduation. Compared with the share of women researchers, the different represents the degree of utilisation (in the country) of potential female scientists 
 Share of women senior researchers (% based on headcount) || This indicator addresses gender balance in senior research positions. It can be compared with the share of women researchers as a proxi for the openness of the national public research system for career progression of women researchers. 
 Share of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (% based on headcount) || This indicator highlights gender balance in leading positions. It can be compared with the share of women researchers as a proxi for the capacity of the national public research system to ensure career progression for women. 
 Publications by researcher || The indicator has been estimated using the total number of publications in international publications databases and the total number of researchers in the country. Publications are research articles, reviews, notes and letters published in referenced journals which are included in the Scopus database of Elsevier. A full counting method was used at the country level. However, for the EU aggregate, double counts of multiple occurrences of EU Member States in the same record were excluded. Source: Scopus (Elsevier); treatments and calculations: Science Metrix.  It measures the scientific productivity of the national research system. 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher || EU transnational co-publications refer to international co-publications which involve at least one author from an EU country. This category includes both co-publications by authors from at least two different EU Member States (as defined by research papers containing at least two authors' addresses in different countries) and co-publications between one or several authors from the EU together with at least one author from a country outside the EU. It has been estimated using the total number of EU transnational co-publications and the total number of researchers in the country. It is a proxy to analyse the degree of openness of the national system to collaborate within Europe. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher || Extra-EU co-publications is a sub-category of the broader EU transnational co-publications. It refers exclusively to international co-publications involving at least one EU author and at least one non-EU author, as defined by the authors' addresses in different countries. The indicator has been estimated using the total number of Extra-EU co-publications and the total number of researchers in the country. It is a proxy to analyse the degree of openness of the national system to collaborate with researchers working in institutions located outside Europe. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher || The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an international treaty, administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), signed by 133 Paris Convention countries. The PCT makes it possible to seek patent protection for an invention simultaneously in each of a large number of countries by filing a single “international” patent application instead of filing several separate national or regional applications. Indicators based on PCT applications are relatively free from the "home advantage" bias (proportionate to their inventive activity, domestic applicants tend to file more patents in their home country than non-resident applicants). The granting of patents remains under the control of the national or regional patent offices. The national distribution of patent applications is assigned according to the inventor's country of residence. If one application has more than one inventor, the application is divided equally among all of them and subsequently among their countries of residence, thus avoiding double counting. The indicator has been estimated using data computed by Bocconi University (Italy), based on WIPO-PCT applications and PATSTAT database for the number of patent applications and Eurostat for the number of researchers (number of patent applications per country/number of researchers in the same country). In general, patent applications can be filed by researchers and non-researchers. However, data is not available on the occupation of the inventor. Therefore, this proxy is presented to compare the effectiveness of national research systems in terms of PCT patent applications. 

5.12.   
Glossary

2010 European Strategy Forum on Research
Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap[4]: the ESFRI Roadmap identifies new RIs of
pan-European interest corresponding to the long term needs of the European
research communities. It covers all scientific areas, regardless of possible
location. 
Applied research: applied research is an original investigation
undertaken in order to acquire new knowledge. It is, however, directed
primarily towards a specific practical aim or objective (Source: OECD, 2002).

Assessment or evaluation procedure (within
the context of funding allocation): evaluation procedure which analyses the entire institution in terms of
input, throughput (processes) and output factors. Among the latter, the
assessment may include research performance and may be linked to funding
allocation. Salaries and other staff costs are not included in the assessment.
Associate country to the EU Framework Programme (AC): several countries are associated with the implementation of the EU
7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. These
include Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland and Turkey.
Basic (fundamental) research: basic research is experimental or
theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of underlying
foundations of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular
application or use in view (Source: OECD, 2002).
Cloud services: services to remotely deliver computing and storage
capacity to end-users.
Collaboration programmes (within the context of international
cooperation): programmes whose activities have been agreed on or arranged by
the national agency and agencies of one or more third countries aimed at
promoting collaboration in research between organisations or individuals from
these countries.
Collaborative agreement: an agreement between two or more legal
entities to co-invest in the R&D of products or processes.  
Computing services: services enabling researchers to use
local or remote computing resources, offered, for example, by High Performance
Computers, or distributed grid- or cloud-based computing infrastructures. For
example, PRACE and EGI support the development and provision of these services
in the EU.
Dedicated staff employed in knowledge
transfer activities:
number of employed people engaged in KT activity.
Digital research services: examples of digital services include
scientific repositories, computing services, cloud services (from external
provider), scientific software, research collaboration platform, etc.
European Union (EU): economic and political union of 28
Member States. EU countries namely: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands,
Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United
Kingdom. 
EU countries: countries which are part of the EU. These include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. 
EU Framework Programme for Research and
Technological Development:
the EU's main instrument for funding research in Europe. It provides grants to
research actors in Europe and beyond, in order to co-finance research,
technological development and demonstration projects. Grants are determined on
the basis of calls for proposals and a peer review process.
EURAXESS portal[5]: a service which provides information and
services to mobile researchers.
European Charter for Researchers and the
Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers[6]: aims to ensure that the nature of the
relationship between researchers and employers or funders is conducive to
successful performance in generating, transferring, sharing and disseminating
knowledge and technological development, and to the career development of
researchers. It outlines a set of general principles and requirements which
specifies the roles, responsibilities and entitlements of researchers as well
as those of employers and/or researcher funders. The Code of Conduct for the
recruitment of researchers consists of a set of general principles and
requirements that should be followed by employers and/or funders when
appointing or recruiting researchers. The principles are complementary to those
in the European Charter for Researchers.
European Research Council (ERC)[7]:
the mission of the ERC is to encourage the highest quality research in Europe through competitive funding and to support investigator-initiated frontier research
across all fields of research, on the basis of scientific excellence. 
Evaluation: process of evaluating after completion, the outcome,
results and impacts of projects, programmes and/or research agendas.
Federated electronic identity: federated identity allows researchers to use their own organisation
user account when accessing other organisations' digital services.
Full Time Equivalent (FTE):  a unit to measure employment, taking into
account work load of individual persons (average number of hours worked per
week). An FTE of 1 means that the person is equivalent to a full-time worker,
while an FTE of 0.5 signals that the worker works only half-time.
Gender balanced committee/panel: a committee/panel is considered gender balanced when the
percentage of members of the under-represented sex is at least 40%. In cases of
committees/panels with only three members, these committees are considered
‘gender balanced’ if they are represented by both sexes.
Gender dimension in research content: making gender a dimension of research by
integrating it as part of the research design and process. This entails sex and
gender analysis being integrated into basic and applied research.
Gender equality (GE): also known as sex equality or sexual
equality. It is the goal of equality of genders. GE entails making women's
rights equal to men's, and making men's rights equal to women's.
Gender equality plan (GEP): a GEP is a consistent set of provisions
and actions aiming at ensuring GE.
Grant: research specific grant, with funding associated
with setting up a medium- and/or long-term research programme. The term 'grant'
used in this survey does not include grants to doctorate candidates for
short-term mobility.
Head of organisation: highest decision making official in the
organisation (e.g. rector or equivalent in the academy, president or equivalent
in non-academic research organisations).
Headcount: headcount
data measures the total number of persons who are fully or partially
employed by an organisation.
Human Resources (HR) Strategy for
Researchers (HRS4R): it supports research
institutions and funding organisations in the implementation of the Charter
& Code (C&C) in their policies and practices.[8]
Innovation: the implementation of a new or significantly
improved product (goods or services) in the market, or implementation of new or
significantly improved processes or a new organisational or marketing method, never
used before.
Institutional funding: general funding of institutions with no
direct selection of R&D project or programmes. There are various formulae
for the allocation of institutional funding that consider, to a lower or higher
extent, the research performance. In some cases, institutional funding includes
a quota related to number of staff, students etc. (Source: OECD, 2011). 
International organisation: an international organisation arises from
an association of states. It is established on the basis of a treaty or similar
act and has an international legal personality distinct from that of its Member
States. It has an international membership, scope, or presence.[9]
Joint research agendas: annual or multiannual research agendas
for a joint programme between EU Member States outside the framework of the EU
Framework Programme. Joint research agendas include activities such as JPIs and
ERA-Net+ where the bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.
Knowledge transfer (KT): the process of transferring the rights to
use and exploit knowledge from one source. It is transferred to those in a
position to best exploit it in placing new products and services on the market.
Lead agency: this procedure foresees that research councils
accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the
‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in
their respective countries (e.g. DE, AT, CH). 
Leading researcher: internationally recognised researcher (e.g.
team leader, in management positions, full professor, etc.).
Legal status: the relative position or standing of an organisation
in the eyes of the law.
Licence held: all licenses, options and assignments for all types
of IP (count multiple (identical) licences with a value of less than EUR 500 as
one licence).[10]
Licence income: total income from all types of know-how and
intellectual property (patents, copyright, designs, material transfer
agreements, confidentiality agreements, plant breeder rights, etc.) before
disbursement to the inventor or other parties. It includes license issue fees,
annual fees, option fees and milestone, termination and cash-in payments. It excludes
licence income forwarded to institutions other than those served by the KT
office or to companies.
Money-Follows-Cooperation Line: this scheme allows small parts of a
project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in
a different country (overhead costs are, however, excluded).
Money-Follows-Researcher (MfR): this scheme enables researchers moving to
a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going grant
funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to
original terms and objectives.
National identification number: a unique number allocated to organisations or individuals for the
purposes of work, taxation, government benefits, health care, and other
government-related functions. The equivalent of the national identification
number for private organisations is the value added tax identification number.

Non-governmental sector: the non-governmental sector includes
organisations which are neither a part of a government nor conventional
for-profit businesses.
Open access: refers to the practice of granting free access to
research outputs over the internet, most notably peer-reviewed publications and
research data. 
Organisation under private law with
public mission: refers to a public sector body or a
legal entity governed by private law with a public service mission[11].

Patent: an exclusive right granted by a government authority (typically a patent office) for an invention, which is a product or a
process that provides a new way of doing something or offers a new technical
solution to a problem. In order to be patentable, the invention must fulfil
certain conditions[12].
Patent application: an application made to a government
authority (typically a patent office) to have a patent granted for invention.
An invention  is a product or a process that provides, in general, a new way of
doing something or offers a new technical solution to a problem.  In order to
be patentable, the invention must fulfil certain conditions[13].
Peer review:
the evaluation of research proposals by independent external experts, based on
transparent evaluation criteria communicated in advance. Peer review can be
based on a group of principles such as excellence, impact, quality and
efficiency of the project implementation[14].
Peer reviewed scientific publications: original empirical or theoretical piece
of work in sciences which are subject to the scrutiny of peers. These peers are
experts in the same field. The peer review process takes place before the paper
is published in a journal.
PhD graduate: an individual who earned a doctoral diploma, having successfully
completed a PhD programme.[15]
PhD candidate: an individual who attends a PhD program in order to obtain a PhD
diploma. 
Portability of grants: situation in which a researcher who moves
to a different country may transfer an on-going grant.
Post-doc: a postdoctoral research candidate has completed
doctoral studies and intends to further deepen expertise in a specialised
subject.
Principles for innovative doctoral training[16]: the principles include research
excellence, attractive institutional environment, interdisciplinary research
options, exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors,
international networking, transferable skills training and quality assurance.
Private organisation without a public
mission: a firm or company in the private
(non-public) sector of an economy whose main aim is to generate profit, which
is controlled and operated by private individuals (and not by civil servants or
government-employees) and is not accountable to governmental organisations[17].
Project-based funding: funding attributed on the basis of a
project submission by a group or individuals for an R&D activity that is
limited in scope, budget and time (Source: OECD, 2011).
Public sector: includes the government and higher education sectors
but excludes public-sector corporations who are part of the business enterprise
sector, as defined in the Frascati Manual. The higher education sector may
include private and public corporations as well as private not-for-profit
organisations as defined in the System of National Accounts (Source: OECD,
2011).
R&D personnel: persons employed directly on R&D as
well as those providing direct services such as R&D managers,
administrators, and clerical staff (Source: OECD, 2002).
Recruitment committee: no matter how they are designated (e.g.
by nomination, election, pool), recruitment committees are set for the
recruitment of one or more persons when there is an open position (at any level
temporary or permanent).
Repository: electronic archive for the storage of academic publications
such as peer reviewed scientific articles.
R&D budget (for RFOs): the estimation of the total amount of
funds (or revenue and expenses) handled by the organisation for the purpose of
funding R&D activities.
R&D budget (for RPOs): the estimation of the total amount of
funds (or revenue and expenses) handled by the organisation for the purpose of
performing and funding R&D activities. It should include overheads but not
funding for teaching activities.
Research and experimental development
(R&D): research and
experimental development comprise creative work undertaken on a systematic
basis in order to increase both the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of
man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new
applications (Source: OECD, 2002).
Research and Technology Organisations
(RTOs): mission-oriented
providers of innovation services to governments and firms, dedicated to
improving quality of life and building economic competiveness.[18]
Research collaboration platform: a collaboration platform which gathers
scientific resources, tools, data and work management facilities to enable
remote collaboration and exchanges between researchers on a specific research
topic or working as a research team.
Research data (within the context of open access to research data): data collected, observed or created for the
purpose of analysis to produce original research results.[19]
Research evaluation committees: these are responsible for the evaluation of
research projects and programmes as well as performance at the institutional or
individual level. The outcome of the evaluation may be linked to the allocation
of research funding and/or other resources.
Research infrastructures (RIs): an RI comprises facilities, resources and
related services used by the scientific community to conduct top-level research
in their respective fields. Examples include singular large-scale research
installations, collections, special habitats, libraries, databases, biological
archives, integrated arrays of small research installations, high-capacity/high
speed communication networks, highly distributed capacity and capability
computing facilities, data infrastructure, etc.
Researcher: a professional engaged in the conception or creation
of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems and also in project
management. Postgraduate students at the PhD level engaged in R&D should be
considered as researchers (OECD, 2002).  
Scientific software: software for specific scientific tasks,
such as modelling and visualisation of data, or operating specific virtual
laboratory experiments. This kind of software can be installed in one
institution and also accessed remotely by researchers from other institutions.
Structure for KT activities: a structure in place which facilitates or
incentivises KT. This could be a formal Knowledge/Technology Transfer Office or
dedicated staff.
Structured innovative doctoral training
programmes: these apply all the principles for
innovative doctoral training. The principles include research excellence,
attractive institutional environment, interdisciplinary research options,
exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors, international
networking, transferable skills training and quality assurance[20].
Total number of staff: the total number of employees in an
organisation.
Young researcher: a researcher who is at the beginning of his/her
career. This includes first stage researchers (up to the point of PhD), post-docs
and junior researchers.
SOURCES
OECD (2011): OECD Science, Technology and
Industry Scoreboard 2011: Innovation and Growth in Knowledge Economies[21]
OECD (2005): Oslo Manual: Guidelines for
Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd Edition[22]
OECD (2002): Proposed Standard Practice for
Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, Frascati Manual 2002[23]
World Intellectual Property Organisation

5.13.   
Concepts used in the analysis of national policy
context in support of ERA

PROJECT-BASED FUNDING IN THE COUNTRY
The allocation of public research funding
is typically done via two mechanisms: allocation of funding through open calls
for proposals (also known as project-based funding) and institutional funding.
Project-based funding is attributed on the basis of a project submission by a
group or individuals for an R&D activity that is limited in scope, budget
and time. One example is the EU Framework Programme which allocates public
funding via open calls for proposals. 
USE OF CORE PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL
PEER REVIEW 
When evaluating open calls for proposals, a
rigorous peer review process using the international principles should be in
place. The evaluation of research proposals should be carried out by
independent external experts based on transparent and evaluation criteria
communicated in advance. The problem is that there is no consensus on the core
principles of international peer review. In agreement with the Julia in the
survey we indicated that: Peer review can be based on a group of principles
such as excellence, impact, quality and efficiency of the project
implementation. This reflects the criteria used at EU level in the Framework
Programme.
INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING BASED ON
INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT
Institutional funding refers to general
funding of research institutions (incl. universities) with no direct selection
of R&D projects or programmes. It can be bulk funding based on past figures
(e.g. number of staff/PhD candidates, past funding budgets). In other cases,
funding allocation can be based on research performance. Performance-based
institutional funding means that the quality of research-performing
organisations, their teams and their output is assessed and constitutes the
basis for institutional funding decisions. In some case, a 'formula' is used
for calculating the funding (for example, in some countries a mix between
number of PhD candidates, disciplines and publications is used). For the
purpose of the survey, the following definition was used: Assessment or
evaluation procedure: evaluation procedure which analyses the entire
institution in terms of input, throughput (processes) and output factors. Among
the latter, the assessment may include research performance and may be linked
to funding allocation. Salaries and other staff costs are not included in the
assessment.
JOINT PROGRAMMING INITIATIVES (JPIs)
Research efforts can be essential to
address major societal challenges. In some cases these are so great that
national research programmes cannot tackle them effectively on their own. Yet,
the vast bulk of research programmes in Europe are run in isolation, leading to
unwanted fragmentation or ineffectiveness. Joint programming aims to remedy
this situation. 
The overall aim of the joint programming
process is to pool national research efforts in order to make better use of Europe's precious public R&D resources and to tackle common European challenges more
effectively in a few key areas.
It is a structured and strategic process
whereby Member States agree, on a voluntary basis and in a partnership
approach, on common visions and Strategic Research Agendas (SRA) to address
major societal challenges. On a variable geometry basis, Member States commit
to JPIs where they implement together joint SRAs.
What is of utmost importance is that MSs
express how they participate in JPI activities. Only presenting the funding
volume allocated to a joint call or in RIs is not enough. Ideally, they should
indicate how the participation in JPIs is reflected in their national
programming landscape (alignment).
The JPI is a vehicle to increase common
funding principles, mutual peer review recognition, international joint peer
review etc. That is why there are less important criteria for the assessment,
and hierarchically the JPI participation of a MS should be assessed first.
Pour mémoire, there are 10 JPIs:
Neurodegenerative diseases (JPND); Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change
(FACCE); Healthy diet for a healthy life (Diet and Health JPI); Cultural
Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe; Healthy Ageing – More
Years, Better Lives (Demographic Change); Anti-Microbial resistance; Water
Challenges for a Changing World; Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans; JPI
Climate and Urban Europe.
Alignment can be characterised as:
The strategic approach taken by Member
States’ programming authorities to modify their national programmes and
activities as a consequence of the adoption of joint priorities at EU level
Public-public partnerships (for example the Strategic Research Agendas of
JPIs).
Alignment is gradual and very hard to
detect and the assessment to what extent a MS aligns its national programmes
towards a JPI should at this stage remain at the level of what
strategies/programmes/action plans are in place for participation in a JPI.
Joint strategic research agendas: annual or
multiannual research agendas for a joint programme between EU Member States
outside the framework of the EU Framework Programme. Joint strategic research
agendas are the basis of JPIs, ERA-Nets or other joint programmes where the
bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.
ARTICLE 185 INITIATIVES
Article 185 TFEU (ex Article 169 TEC)
states that: 'In implementing the multiannual framework programme, the Union
may make provision, in agreement with the Member States concerned, for
participation in R&D programmes undertaken by several Member States,
including participation in the structures created for the execution of those
programmes.' 
In practical terms, Article 185 TFEU
foresees the participation of the EU in the joint implementation of (parts of) R&D
national programmes. The participating EU Member States integrate their
research efforts by defining and committing themselves to a joint research
programme, based on the voluntary integration of scientific, managerial and
financial aspects. The EU provides financial support to the joint
implementation of the (parts of the) national research programmes involved,
based on a joint programme and the setting-up of a dedicated implementation
structure.
ERA-NETS
ERA-Nets are an FP instrument for the coordination
of national and regional research programmes through joint activities such as
joint calls for trans-national proposals. Under FP7, ERA-NET Plus provided
additional EU financial support to facilitate joint calls for proposals between
national and/or regional programmes.
H2020 essentially merged the ERA-NET and
ERA-NET Plus instrument into a single new instrument called ERA-NET Co-fund. 
OTHER JOINT RESEARCH AGENDAS
These concern bi- or multilateral
agreements or programmes in place among EU-MS and AC.
MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF EVALUATIONS THAT
CONFORM TO INTERNATIONAL PEER-REVIEW STANDARDS
Mutual recognition or (Lead Agency
Procedure) of each other’s peer review implies that the national funding
agencies have signed an agreement or MoU that regulates this procedure. If a
national funding agency cedes the right to nationally evaluate its project
proposals to another agency, it recognises the peer review of the other agency
and bases its funding decision on it. This can sometimes be a one way process
only and this is not mutual recognition. Mutual recognition will be easier if
funding agencies apply similar peer review standards, e.g. international peer
review. 
COMMON FUNDING PRINCIPLES TO MAKE NATIONAL
RESEARCH PROGRAMMES COMPATIBLE, INTEROPERABLE (CROSS-BORDER) AND SIMPLER FOR
RESEARCHERS
This goes more into the technicalities of
what measures and procedures funding agencies have put into place to implement
cross-border activities. We are not interested in cross-border activities that
are based on EC-co-funded activities (ERA-Net, Article 185) because there the Commission
requires them anyway in order to harmonise their rules. 
By common funding principles we mean: 
•           Definition of priorities
(calls, programmes);
•           Eligibility criteria; 
•           Standards for proposal
evaluation;
•           Selection decisions; 
•           Definition of eligible costs;
•           Funding rates;
•           Reporting requirements; 
•           Intellectual property rights
issues.
PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND
OPERATION OF RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES INCLUDED IN THE ESFRI ROADMAP
ESFRI, the European Strategy Forum on
Research Infrastructures, is a strategic instrument to develop the scientific
integration of Europe and to strengthen its international outreach. The
competitive and open access to high quality RIs supports and benchmarks the
quality of European scientists' activities and attracts the best researchers
from around the world.
The mission of ESFRI is to support a
coherent and strategy-led approach to policy-making on RI in Europe; and to
facilitate multilateral initiatives leading to the better use and development
of RIs, at EU and international level.
The ESFRI Roadmap identifies new RIs of
pan-European interest corresponding to the long term needs of the European
research communities, covering all scientific areas, regardless of possible
location.
Potential new RI (or major upgrade)
identified are likely to be realised in the next 10 to 20 years. Therefore,
they may have different degrees of maturity but it should be noted that they
are supported by a relevant European partnership or intergovernmental research
organisation. A growing number of countries have prepared national roadmaps
that establish the prioritisation of national and pan-European RIs, using the
ESFRI Roadmap as a reference. This helps to define national budgets,
facilitates political support and enables long-term financial commitment.
PARTICIPATION IN ERICS
The Community legal framework for a
European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) entered into force on 28
August 2009. This specific legal form is designed to facilitate the joint
establishment and operation of RIs of European interest. On 2 December 2013,
the Council adopted the Council Regulation EU n° 1261/2013 amending the
Regulation EC 723-2009 concerning the ERIC. The participation of countries
associated to the EU research framework programmes in ERICs is now on the same
footing as EU Member States. Their contributions to ERICs will be fully
reflected in terms of membership and voting rights. The regulation entered into
force on 26 December 2013.
NATIONAL ROADMAPS LINKED TO ESFRI
RIs play an increasingly important role in
the advancement of knowledge and technology. They are a key instrument in
bringing together a wide diversity of stakeholders to look for solutions to
many of the problems that society is facing today. RIs offer unique research
services to users from different countries, attract young people to science and
help to shape scientific communities.
Types of RIs: The term ‘research
infrastructures’ refers to facilities, resources and related services used by
the scientific community to conduct top-level research in their respective
fields, ranging from social sciences to astronomy and genomics to
nanotechnologies. Examples include singular large-scale research installations,
collections, special habitats, libraries, databases, biological archives, clean
rooms, integrated arrays of small research installations, high-capacity/high
speed communication networks, highly distributed capacity and capability
computing facilities, data infrastructure, research vessels, satellite and
aircraft observation facilities, coastal observatories, telescopes,
synchrotrons and accelerators, networks of computing facilities, as well as
infrastructural centres of competence which provide a service for the wider
research community based on an assembly of techniques and know-how. RIs may be
‘single-sited’ (a single resource at a single location), ‘distributed’ (a
network of distributed resources), or ‘virtual’ (the service is provided
electronically).
These key infrastructures have not only been
responsible for some of the greatest scientific discoveries and technological
developments, but are also influential in attracting the best researchers from
around the world and in building bridges between national and research
communities and scientific disciplines.
The list of available national roadmaps can
be found at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=esfri-national-roadmaps
ACCESS TO RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES OF
PAN-EUROPEAN INTEREST
Member States may have taken actions to
ensure access to their national RIs. 
The Commission has also been supporting
access to effective RIs for researchers all over Europe for more than a decade.
This action has been instrumental in enhancing European researchers' access to
the infrastructures they require to conduct their research, irrespective of the
location of the facility.
It is now possible to see on an interactive map the location of RIS  that
open their doors to all researchers in Europe. This map
 (http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=mapri)
 shows the location of the RIs funded under the Seventh Framework
Programme that provide transnational access to researchers. These
infrastructures form part of networks supported through Integrating Activity
projects with a view to making the most of existing facilities by optimising
their use for the benefit of the scientific communities.
GENDER
All MSs comply with the EU directives on
equal opportunities and equal treatment. In general MSs transpose the EU
legislation in the general national legislation related to the labour market,
according to their national legal system, (it might be an Equality Act, a
Gender Equality Law or another type of legislation). 
In terms of implementation of EU legal
provisions, employers of researchers, as with any other employer, must comply
with the EU legislation on equal opportunities and equal treatment. The main
directive (2006/54)  covers the implementation of these principles in
employment and occupation, including equal pay for equal work or work of equal
value, vocational training, promotion and working conditions, occupational
social security schemes, returning after maternity leave and paternity leave.
It also provides for positive action. Furthermore, the Council Directive (96/34/EC) 
lays down minimum requirements on parental leave designed to facilitate the
reconciliation of parental and professional responsibilities for working
parents for all workers, men and women, who have an employment contract or
employment relationship as defined by the law, collective agreements or
practices in force in each MS.
The aim of the present analysis is to focus
on public research thereby giving a picture of national provisions and
initiatives relating to GE in this sector, including related indicators.  This
is done by assessing three groups of actions at national level:
•           Specific actions (SAs) for the
implementation of the EU directives in the specific sector of public research; 
•           Positive actions (PAs)
providing specific advantages in order to make it easier for the
under-represented sex to pursue a vocational activity or to prevent or
compensate for disadvantages in professional careers within the public research
sector; 
•           Additional actions (AAs) to
achieve GE in R&D. These actions are not covered by the EU directives on GE
in the labour market. They address institutional changes in the public research
sector in order to correct gender inequalities and ensure GE. They also cover
actions relating to the integration of the gender dimension in research
content/programmes. 
 FOSTER CULTURAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
ON GENDER
In terms of policy at the national level,
we need to pay attention if MSs have the following additional actions:
•           Specific laws/acts regulating
GE in public research, for instance as those in AT, ES, NO, FR (since 2013) and
BE (Walloon region); 
•           Acts/incentives stimulating or
obliging RPOs to explicitly set up GEPs; for instance the laws on GE in ES, AT
and NO, performance agreements in AT, Athena Swan in the UK, the Finnish
Equality Act covering educational institutions such as universities;
•           Strategies (i.e. guidelines,
charters/codes, awards, etc.) at the national/ministerial or at the regional
level for GE in RPOs. For instance the UK Athena Swan award, the AT performance
agreements and the NO GE Award.
CAREERS –WORKING CONDITIONS IN PUBLIC
RESEARCH 
Concerning researchers’ careers and their
working conditions, the possibilities could be:
•           SAs implementing or
facilitating the implementation in public research of the EU directives
covering maternity leave (2006/54) and parental leave (96/34) and support given
to researchers’ careers to cope with career breaks and facilitate  re-entry;
•           Access to funding is a key
element of researchers’ career. In almost all countries statistical evidence
exists of higher success rates for men in access to research funding than for
women. Therefore, the analysis could look at the existence of provisions to
ensure a balanced participation of women and men in research
programmes/projects at national or regional level, or at the level of RFOs,
such as NordForsk; 
•           Positive Actions targeting
women, such as incentives given to RPOs for the recruitment and promotion of
female researchers (i.e. 'Excellentia programme' in AT, Federal Programme for Female
Professors in DE, additional chairs awarded if a certain benchmark is reached
in DK, BALANSE Programme in NO, ASPASIA Programme in NL) and actions to support
women researchers individually (i.e. awards such as the L’Oreal Prize,
fellowships). It’s important to check if these incentives are provided at the
national/regional, level or by RFOs and other funders. 
GENDER BALANCE IN PUBLIC RESEARCH DECISION
MAKING
Several measures can help to address gender
imbalances in decision making processes. In particular they concern the setting
up of quotas and targets in decision making bodies of RPOs by national or
regional authorities:
•           Quotas in decision making
bodies of RPOs;
•           Targets in decision making
bodies of RPOs.
GENDER DIMENSION IN RESEARCH CONTENT/PROGRAMMES

This entails the integration of sex and/or
gender analysis in research content:
•           Gender dimension (GD) is
integrated in research content/programmes. If yes, it’s important to check at
which level GD is integrated. For example, in 2013 NordForsk adopted a new
funding policy requiring GD to be explicitly mentioned (hence evaluated) in the
research proposals where relevant; the Irish Research Council in 2013;
•           There are dedicated
budgets/programmes for women/gender studies. 
OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICATIONS AND DATA
RESULTING FROM PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH
 Open access can be defined as the practice
of providing on-line access to scientific information (please note that term
'scientific' refers to all scholarly disciplines) that is free of charge to the
user and is re-usable. In the context of R&D, 'scientific information' can
refer to (i) peer-reviewed scientific research articles (published in scholarly
journals) or (ii) research data (data underlying publications, curated data
and/or raw data). The general guideline is that the Commission mandates open
access (OA) for publications and encourages OA to data, although it is not
prescriptive in how the Member States achieve OA, e.g. via the green or the
gold route for publication or via hard or soft law.
(i) OA to scientific publications refers to
free of charge online access for any user. Legally binding definitions of 'open
access' and 'access' in this context do not exist, but authoritative
definitions of OA can be found in key political declarations on this subject
(Budapest Declaration (2002), Berlin Declaration (2003)). There are two main
routes towards OA to publications:
A.        Self-archiving (also referred to
as 'green' OA) means that the published article or the final peer-reviewed
manuscript is archived (deposited) by the author - or a representative - in an
online repository before, alongside or after its publication. Repository
software usually allows authors to delay access to the article (‘embargo
period’).
B.        OA publishing (also referred to
as 'gold' OA) means that an article is immediately provided in OA mode as
published. In this model, the payment of publication costs shifts away from
readers, paying access via subscriptions. The business model most often
encountered is based on one-off payments by authors. These costs (often
referred to as Author Processing Charges, (APCs)) can usually be borne by the
university or research institute to which the researcher is affiliated, or to
the funding agency supporting the research. In other cases, the costs of OA
publishing are covered by subsidies or other funding models. 
(ii) OA to research data refers to the
right to access and re-use digital research data under the terms and conditions
set out as a formal obligation. Openly accessible research data can typically
be accessed, mined, exploited, reproduced and disseminated free of charge to
the user. Please note that 'Research data' refers to information, in particular
facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered as a basis for
reasoning, discussion or calculation. In a research context, examples of data
include statistics, results of experiments, measurements, observations
resulting from fieldwork, survey results, interview recordings and images. The
focus is on research data that is available in digital form.
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER AND OPEN INNOVATION
OI is the emerging paradigm for innovation,
involving business models that use partnering, licensing and venturing to
combine internal and external sources of ideas and technologies (DG
Enterprise). In its truest sense it is the open circulation of knowledge
between companies and research organisations. It helps to create and share knowledge.
The central idea behind OI is that, in a world of widely distributed knowledge,
companies cannot afford to rely entirely on their own research, but should
instead buy patented processes or other inventions from other companies. In
addition, internal inventions not being used in a firm's business should be
taken outside the company (e.g. through licensing, joint ventures or
spin-offs).
KT: involves the processes for capturing,
collecting and sharing explicit and tacit knowledge, including skills and
competence. It includes both commercial and non-commercial activities such as
research collaborations, consultancy, licensing, spin-off creation, researcher
mobility, publication, etc. While the emphasis is on scientific and
technological knowledge, other forms such as technology-enabled business
processes are also concerned (DG Enterprise). In the ERA survey the following
definition was used: KT is the process of transferring the rights to use and
exploit knowledge from one source. It is transferred to those in a position to
best exploit it in placing new products and services on the market.
KT as a 3rd pillar: The OI/KT expert group
report (2014) refers to the triple helix concept which puts entrepreneurial
universities at the heart of the innovation ecosystem. It describes how the
potential of innovation and economic development in a knowledge society lies in
a more prominent role for universities and the hybridisation of elements from
university, industry and government to generate new institutional and social
formats for the production, transfer and application of knowledge. KT can be
specific as a 3rd pillar in the policies/strategies or KT can form part of an
innovation strategy. 
POLICIES FOR PUBLIC E-INFRASTRUCTURES AND
ASSOCIATED DIGITAL RESEARCH SERVICES
Public e-infrastructure
E-Infrastructure is a technical
infrastructure that makes digital research services possible, such as:
•           High-speed network infrastructure (GEANT) (check whether
the country has a research and education network at
 http://www.geant.net/About/partners/Pages/Home.aspx);
•           Computational infrastructures
(high-performance, grid and cloud computing);
•           Grid computing: which applies
the resources of many computers in a network to a single problem;
•           Cloud computing, and cloud
services in particular, offer the research and education (R&E) sector huge
opportunities to both maximise effectiveness and reduce the capital investment
and development time for projects. They offer the R&E community a number of
key benefits: •Reduced capital costs; •Reduced support costs; •The ability to
leverage purchasing power across the community; •Easier remote access for
collaborative projects and users; •Scalability. By utilising shared and
off-the-shelf services for commodity activities, the R&E community can
refocus its design, development and support resources into those fields that
cannot be easily provided by the commercial sector. However, together with
these benefits there are risks associated with security, data integrity and
reliability which need to be addressed when selecting and purchasing cloud
services;
•           Data infrastructures (data
repositories, data services, authentication and authorisation infrastructure,
digital authors identification, data object identifiers). 
DIGITAL RESEARCH SERVICES
Digital research services make reference to
computing services, cloud services, scientific software (e.g. for simulation
and visualisation), research collaboration platforms, virtual laboratories and
remote instrumentation. 
•           Collaboration support: this
includes network collaboration tools, such as Voice over IP and group
collaboration services; provision of networked e-Science resources, including
cloud resources; e-learning; interaction with NREN clients and relatively new
areas of broker services and software development;
•           Cloud services: see above (collaboration
support);
•           Research collaboration
platforms: if you are interested in the topic, check
http://www.terena.org/publications/files/TERENA-Compendium-2013.pdf pages 67-85;
•           Premium service means
consultancy and security audits, but not NREN service implementation support.
FEDERATED ELECTRONIC IDENTITIES
Cross-organisational researcher identity
(federated identity): Digital authentication and authorisation in a cross-organisational
manner, i.e. the possibility to use the user account in one (home) organisation
to access services in another organisation. 
Identity Management System: (ldM), a system
that combines technologies and policies to allow institutions to store users’
personal information and keep it up to date. An ldM is the first step to providing
authentication and authorisation infrastructure -  a term used for systems
supporting the process of determining both (1) whether users are who they
declare themselves to be (authentication) and (2) that they have the
appropriate rights or privileges necessary to access a resource (authorisation)
- for a local or federated environment. 
eduGAIN is intended to simplify the
movement of people and data between federations, providing all the resources
that researchers need. NRENs will offer a greater range of services to their
users, delivered by multiple federations in a truly collaborative environment;
and service providers will offer their services to users in different
federations.

5.14.   
Sources of information

Official sources:
Eurostat 

 Total GBAORD by NABS 2007 socio-economic
     objectives:

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do;jsessionid=9ea7d07d30dee944cfc4811346f498c4da83635b2550.e34OaN8PchaTby0Lc3aNchuNa3qOe0
Extracted on 14.03.14

 Total GBAORD as a % of total general
     government expenditure [gba_nabste]

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsc00007&plugin=1

Extracted on 23.04.14

 Total GBAORD by funding mode

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=gba_fundmod&lang=en

Extracted on 14.05.14

 National public funding to transnationally
     coordinated R&D

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=gba_tncoor&lang=en

Extracted on 23.04.14

 Share of women researchers, by sectors of
     performance

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsc00005&plugin=1


 Graduations in ISCED 3 to 6 by field of
     education and sex

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=educ_grad5&lang=en
Extracted on 19.06.14

 Population on 1 January by age and sex [demo_pjan]

Extracted on   23.04.14
Other sources
 Mathieu
Doussineau, Elisabetta Marinelli, Mariana Chioncel, Karel Haegeman, Gérard
Carat, Mark Boden, ERA Communication Synthesis Report, European Commission
JRC-IPTS, 2013
Researcher’s Report 2014
She figures, 2012  
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she-figures-2012_en.pdf
Bibliometrics
European
Commission - Analysis and monitoring of national research policies Unit, based
on information provided by Science-Metrix (Scopus).
Patents
European
Commission - Analysis and monitoring of national research policies Unit, based
on information provided by University Bocconi.

5.15.   
Results of the survey by country
 
   || ERA compliant || Limited  compliance to ERA || ERA not applicable 
  Share of organisations which implement open access for data || 27.5 || 29.6 || 35.7 
 Share of organisations which implement cloud services || 38.9 || 17.9 || 11.6 
 Share of organisations which consider the gender dimension in research content || 47.7 || 21.8 || 27.6 
 Share of organisation which advertise their research vacancies on Euraxess || 50.7 || 6.9 || 3.5 
 Share of organisations which provide federated electronic identity to their researchers || 55.3 || 33.8 || 22.1 
 Share of organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || 62.1 || 18.9 || 16.1 
 Share of organisations which have adopted the Charter and Code principles || 62.3 || 9.6 || 13.6 
 Share of organisations whose institutional funding is based on performance assessment by the funding organisation || 64.3 || 36.6 || 25.6 
 Share of organisation which implement innovative doctoral training || 73.1 || 28.7 || 15.1 
 Share of organisations which have a structure to promote knowledge transfer || 79.8 || 30.4 || 20.6 
 Share of organisations which include minimum requirements when publishing research vacancies || 85.6 || 44.2 || 24.6 
   || Project Based funding || Institutional funding based on institutional assessment || Institutional funding not based on institutional assessment 
 AL || 70.0 || 0.0 || 30.0 
 AT || 49.0 || 15.3 || 0.4 
 BA || 67.0 || 0.0 || 33.0 
 BE || 45.9 || 46.2 || 6.9 
 BG || 80.0 || 0.0 || 20.0 
 CH || 98.7 || 0.0 || 1.3 
 CY || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 CZ || 53.2 || 45.4 || 1.2 
 DE || 56.9 || 42.2 || 0.0 
 DK || 77.1 || 22.6 || 0.2 
 EE || 89.4 || 5.5 || 0.0 
 EL || 75.5 || 0.0 || 24.5 
 ES || 64.6 || 0.4 || 33.5 
 FI || 91.5 || 0.0 || 8.4 
 FO || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 89.2 || 1.6 || 9.1 
 HR || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 HU || 82.4 || 0.0 || 17.6 
 IE || 78.8 || 1.6 || 12.1 
 IL || 99.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 51.4 || 35.7 || 12.9 
 LT || 47.1 || 25.2 || 27.7 
 LU || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 81.4 || 18.5 || 0.0 
 ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 NL || 89.2 || 7.8 || 2.9 
 NO || 81.4 || 13.3 || 5.3 
 PL || 92.0 || 6.8 || 0.0 
 PT || 79.7 || 8.9 || 0.0 
 RO || 97.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SE || 81.4 || 15.2 || 2.5 
 SI || 24.9 || 7.9 || 33.8 
 SK || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 UK || 80.0 || 20.0 || 0.0 
   || Share of funding allocated to joint research agendas (RFO) 
 AL || 0.0 
 AT || 1.9 
 BA || 0.0 
 BE || 2.6 
 BG || 0.0 
 CH || 0.0 
 CY || 0.7 
 CZ || 0.6 
 DE || 0.8 
 DK || 16.3 
 EE || 0.1 
 EL || 0.9 
 ES || 0.1 
 FI || 5.3 
 FO || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 
 FR || 5.3 
 HR || 0.0 
 HU || 0.0 
 IE || 0.3 
 IL || 0.0 
 IS || 2.0 
 IT || 1.9 
 LI || 0.0 
 LT || 0.1 
 LU || 10.0 
 LV || 0.9 
 MD || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 
 MT || 28.5 
 NL || 9.2 
 NO || 1.0 
 PL || 2.0 
 PT || 3.8 
 RO || 3.0 
 RS || 0.0 
 SE || 2.8 
 SI || 0.7 
 SK || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 
 UK || 0.9 
   || Share of funding allocated to international cooperation (%) 
 AL || 0.0 
 AT || 0.2 
 BA || 0.0 
 BE || 0.2 
 BG || 0.0 
 CH || 1.7 
 CY || 0.0 
 CZ || 1.1 
 DE || 4.3 
 DK || 2.0 
 EE || 0.0 
 EL || 1.0 
 ES || 0.5 
 FI || 1.6 
 FO || 0.0 
 FR || 2.6 
 HR || 0.0 
 HU || 0.0 
 IE || 0.0 
 IL || 0.0 
 IS || 0.0 
 IT || 0.4 
 LT || 0.5 
 LU || 0.0 
 LV || 0.9 
 ME || 0.0 
 MT || 0.0 
 NL || 2.1 
 NO || 2.7 
 PL || 1.4 
 PT || 2.5 
 RO || 0.8 
 SE || 1.1 
 SI || 0.7 
 SK || 0.0 
 UK || 1.9 
   || Share of funding received from abroad by RPOs 
 AL || 0.08 
 AT || 1.08 
 BA || 0.00 
 BE || 0.02 
 BG || 3.95 
 CH || 0.85 
 CY || 3.37 
 CZ || 0.01 
 DE || 1.22 
 DK || 1.36 
 EE || 0.00 
 EL || 1.98 
 ES || 1.08 
 FI || 0.65 
 FO || 0.00 
 FP || 0.00 
 FR || 0.20 
 HR || 0.66 
 HU || 8.44 
 IE || 4.02 
 IL || 0.00 
 IS || 0.68 
 IT || 0.25 
 LI || 0.00 
 LT || 0.55 
 LU || 0.00 
 LV || 0.88 
 MD || 0.00 
 ME || 0.00 
 MK || 0.00 
 MT || 0.00 
 NL || 0.52 
 NO || 1.48 
 PL || 0.40 
 PT || 0.09 
 RO || 0.14 
 RS || 1.94 
 SE || 1.57 
 SI || 0.00 
 SK || 0.54 
 TR || 0.30 
 UK || 3.01 
   || Funding support to the implementation of gender balance (%) 
   || Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable 
 AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 60.2 || 35.4 || 0.0 || 4.0 
 BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 BE || 78.5 || 6.7 || 12.4 || 2.4 
 BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 CH || 93.6 || 2.7 || 0.0 || 3.6 
 CY || 26.3 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 0.0 
 CZ || 0.2 || 57.3 || 30.5 || 9.5 
 DE || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 DK || 22.4 || 0.0 || 21.1 || 56.5 
 EE || 0.0 || 0.0 || 39.3 || 60.7 
 EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.1 || 1.9 
 ES || 76.0 || 0.9 || 13.4 || 9.6 
 FI || 36.7 || 0.0 || 8.9 || 54.4 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 2.8 || 0.0 || 80.8 || 16.4 
 HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 HU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 IE || 45.3 || 0.0 || 25.9 || 4.6 
 IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 0.0 
 IT || 94.0 || 0.0 || 3.3 || 2.7 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 0.0 || 44.1 || 55.9 || 0.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 LV || 7.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.5 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 95.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.0 
 NL || 95.3 || 3.6 || 0.0 || 0.6 
 NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6 
 PL || 61.4 || 0.0 || 38.6 || 0.0 
 PT || 3.6 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5 
 RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 99.9 
 RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SE || 75.7 || 3.8 || 17.1 || 3.3 
 SI || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 UK || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.2 || 0.3 
   || Gender Equality Plans adopted by RPO (%) 
   || Adopted || Not adopted || Not applicable 
 AL || 98.5 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 89.8 || 8.7 || 0.7 
 BA || 0.0 || 31.8 || 54.0 
 BE || 58.2 || 13.5 || 2.6 
 BG || 11.4 || 42.5 || 15.9 
 CH || 96.4 || 1.3 || 0.0 
 CY || 9.0 || 89.1 || 1.2 
 CZ || 26.3 || 23.3 || 9.1 
 DE || 95.7 || 2.0 || 0.1 
 DK || 45.2 || 4.5 || 0.4 
 EE || 0.0 || 84.8 || 2.4 
 EL || 27.4 || 57.9 || 9.6 
 ES || 61.4 || 30.4 || 2.4 
 FI || 90.4 || 6.7 || 0.0 
 FO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 91.7 || 4.5 || 2.9 
 HR || 4.1 || 17.0 || 4.4 
 HU || 39.1 || 54.3 || 3.0 
 IE || 28.7 || 50.4 || 0.0 
 IL || 94.3 || 5.6 || 0.0 
 IS || 97.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 47.4 || 34.9 || 2.1 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 16.8 || 11.3 || 31.3 
 LU || 4.0 || 96.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 2.5 || 29.5 || 10.8 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 99.6 || 0.0 || 0.4 
 NL || 83.0 || 3.0 || 0.1 
 NO || 71.6 || 8.5 || 8.8 
 PL || 19.4 || 50.9 || 2.7 
 PT || 4.4 || 79.2 || 10.3 
 RO || 19.0 || 27.3 || 48.8 
 RS || 12.1 || 55.1 || 1.8 
 SE || 99.0 || 0.8 || 0.1 
 SI || 10.8 || 31.3 || 1.6 
 SK || 2.0 || 67.1 || 17.1 
 TR || 10.0 || 51.5 || 18.3 
 UK || 89.8 || 1.4 || 1.5 
   || Implementation of recruitment and promotion practices by RPO (% RPO weighted) 
 AL || 100.0 
 AT || 78.6 
 BA || 0.0 
 BE || 56.5 
 BG || 6.3 
 CH || 91.0 
 CY || 22.2 
 CZ || 46.2 
 DE || 89.9 
 DK || 34.3 
 EE || 15.0 
 EL || 30.1 
 ES || 30.3 
 FI || 74.9 
 FO || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 
 FR || 57.3 
 HR || 12.2 
 HU || 78.7 
 IE || 49.0 
 IL || 99.9 
 IS || 92.1 
 IT || 24.3 
 LI || 0.0 
 LT || 19.8 
 LU || 4.0 
 LV || 63.3 
 MD || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 
 MT || 100.0 
 NL || 92.7 
 NO || 83.1 
 PL || 34.1 
 PT || 14.3 
 RO || 38.1 
 RS || 9.3 
 SE || 78.8 
 SI || 55.3 
 SK || 9.2 
 TR || 11.3 
 UK || 86.6 
   || Support to the inclusion of gender contents in research agendas by funders (%) 
   || Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable || No answer 
 AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 40.2 || 53.5 || 1.9 || 4.0 || 0.4 
 BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 BE || 0.0 || 45.9 || 44.7 || 9.0 || 0.3 
 BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9 
 CH || 9.3 || 0.0 || 3.7 || 87.1 || 0.0 
 CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3 || 0.0 
 CZ || 0.0 || 0.0 || 87.8 || 3.8 || 8.4 
 DE || 24.6 || 74.6 || 0.0 || 0.7 || 0.0 
 DK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 67.1 || 32.9 || 0.0 
 EE || 0.0 || 0.0 || 42.4 || 57.6 || 0.0 
 EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 ES || 1.7 || 0.2 || 83.5 || 9.7 || 5.0 
 FI || 31.1 || 0.0 || 8.9 || 54.4 || 5.6 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 FR || 0.0 || 5.9 || 93.8 || 0.2 || 0.0 
 HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 HU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IE || 7.3 || 0.0 || 63.9 || 4.6 || 24.2 
 IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 94.0 || 0.0 || 6.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 LT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 95.0 || 5.0 || 0.0 
 NL || 20.0 || 4.3 || 75.2 || 0.0 || 0.6 
 NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6 || 0.0 
 PL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 PT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 63.4 || 33.0 || 3.6 
 RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 SE || 16.8 || 17.5 || 61.4 || 4.2 || 0.0 
 SI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 UK || 0.0 || 0.1 || 3.7 || 2.6 || 93.6 
   || Inclusion of the gender dimension in research contents (% RPO) 
   || Yes || No || Not known || Not applicable 
 AL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 69.9 || 10.0 || 7.7 || 12.4 
 BA || 19.3 || 0.0 || 27.5 || 53.2 
 BE || 57.8 || 15.6 || 25.9 || 0.7 
 BG || 23.0 || 45.0 || 14.1 || 17.8 
 CH || 76.8 || 5.8 || 17.2 || 0.2 
 CY || 1.3 || 1.3 || 85.1 || 12.3 
 CZ || 35.2 || 9.4 || 36.1 || 19.4 
 DE || 62.9 || 9.5 || 14.3 || 13.2 
 DK || 61.1 || 31.6 || 7.1 || 0.1 
 EE || 75.2 || 21.5 || 0.0 || 3.2 
 EL || 4.2 || 59.2 || 3.8 || 32.8 
 ES || 28.1 || 41.4 || 27.7 || 2.8 
 FI || 37.8 || 22.9 || 34.1 || 5.1 
 FO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 50.8 || 27.3 || 6.5 || 15.4 
 HR || 15.6 || 9.6 || 66.3 || 8.4 
 HU || 11.4 || 66.8 || 10.3 || 11.5 
 IE || 45.7 || 49.7 || 3.9 || 0.7 
 IL || 94.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.7 
 IS || 75.0 || 22.0 || 3.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 24.5 || 50.0 || 20.3 || 5.2 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 59.0 || 1.5 || 39.5 || 0.0 
 LU || 51.0 || 49.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 69.9 || 20.5 || 9.0 || 0.6 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 0.4 || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.3 
 NL || 47.1 || 10.8 || 42.0 || 0.1 
 NO || 44.8 || 12.4 || 19.6 || 23.2 
 PL || 25.1 || 35.1 || 27.4 || 12.4 
 PT || 65.3 || 28.1 || 1.6 || 4.9 
 RO || 49.1 || 26.2 || 8.1 || 16.5 
 RS || 56.3 || 18.3 || 24.2 || 1.3 
 SE || 52.9 || 18.2 || 4.1 || 24.8 
 SI || 47.0 || 18.1 || 20.6 || 14.4 
 SK || 15.1 || 15.3 || 44.9 || 24.7 
 TR || 31.5 || 29.4 || 1.5 || 37.5 
 UK || 21.2 || 20.0 || 57.2 || 1.6 
   || Support to open access to publications (% RFO) 
   || Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable 
 AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 64.5 || 0.0 || 30.6 || 4.8 
 BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 BE || 59.5 || 33.8 || 0.0 || 6.7 
 BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9 
 CH || 92.4 || 0.0 || 4.0 || 0.0 
 CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3 
 CZ || 0.0 || 64.5 || 14.1 || 15.6 
 DE || 18.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 81.7 
 DK || 88.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.8 
 EE || 53.2 || 43.7 || 0.0 || 3.1 
 EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.9 
 ES || 74.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 23.7 
 FI || 46.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 53.8 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 78.1 || 2.4 || 13.0 || 3.0 
 HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 HU || 0.0 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 22.9 
 IE || 59.9 || 0.0 || 36.3 || 3.8 
 IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 25.7 || 43.8 || 28.9 || 1.6 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 0.0 || 99.0 || 0.0 || 1.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 92.4 || 7.1 || 0.0 || 0.5 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 95.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.0 
 NL || 75.8 || 20.0 || 3.6 || 0.0 
 NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6 
 PL || 73.0 || 0.0 || 27.0 || 0.0 
 PT || 0.0 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5 
 RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9 || 0.1 
 RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SE || 16.1 || 6.6 || 0.0 || 64.4 
 SI || 32.8 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 67.2 
 SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 UK || 99.5 || 0.3 || 0.2 || 0.0 
   || Support to open access to data (% RFO) 
   || Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable 
 AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 AT || 17.1 || 1.5 || 66.0 || 4.8 
 BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 BE || 46.1 || 4.7 || 42.2 || 6.7 
 BG || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 99.9 
 CH || 8.1 || 0.0 || 87.3 || 0.0 
 CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3 
 CZ || 5.8 || 7.3 || 14.1 || 15.6 
 DE || 18.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 81.7 
 DK || 45.3 || 44.2 || 0.0 || 0.6 
 EE || 0.0 || 43.7 || 53.2 || 3.1 
 EL || 0.0 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ES || 5.6 || 0.0 || 82.5 || 10.3 
 FI || 46.1 || 53.6 || 0.0 || 0.2 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 9.3 || 3.2 || 71.1 || 6.7 
 HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 HU || 0.0 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 22.9 
 IE || 14.6 || 7.3 || 50.1 || 28.0 
 IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 0.3 || 0.0 || 99.7 || 0.0 
 IT || 23.0 || 71.0 || 1.6 || 1.6 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 0.0 || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.6 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 95.0 || 5.0 
 NL || 21.6 || 0.6 || 66.2 || 11.5 
 NO || 0.0 || 88.4 || 0.0 || 11.6 
 PL || 61.4 || 11.6 || 27.0 || 0.0 
 PT || 0.0 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5 
 RO || 99.9 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 
 RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SE || 42.3 || 0.0 || 46.5 || 8.2 
 SI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 32.8 || 67.2 
 SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 UK || 96.7 || 0.2 || 2.7 || 0.2 
   || Support to the implementation of KT and OI (% RFO) 
   || Frequently || Occassionally || None || Not applicable || No answer 
 AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 AT || 43.6 || 38.8 || 15.1 || 2.5 || 0.0 
 BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 BE || 4.9 || 64.7 || 23.7 || 6.7 || 0.0 
 BG || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 CH || 14.0 || 83.3 || 0.0 || 2.7 || 0.0 
 CY || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 CZ || 5.8 || 69.2 || 18.5 || 3.7 || 2.8 
 DE || 74.6 || 4.3 || 0.0 || 21.0 || 0.0 
 DK || 63.4 || 0.0 || 24.3 || 12.0 || 0.4 
 EE || 0.0 || 83.0 || 13.9 || 1.4 || 1.7 
 EL || 0.0 || 98.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.9 
 ES || 96.8 || 3.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FI || 46.1 || 53.7 || 0.0 || 0.2 || 0.0 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 FR || 16.3 || 3.5 || 68.4 || 11.6 || 0.3 
 HR || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 HU || 0.0 || 22.9 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IE || 76.9 || 7.1 || 12.1 || 3.8 || 0.0 
 IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IS || 0.3 || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 25.7 || 74.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 LT || 1.0 || 99.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.1 || 0.5 || 0.0 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 MT || 95.0 || 5.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 NL || 99.4 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 NO || 1.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.6 || 88.4 
 PL || 61.4 || 0.0 || 11.6 || 27.0 || 0.0 
 PT || 62.9 || 37.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 RO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 SE || 41.6 || 13.5 || 41.4 || 0.0 || 3.6 
 SI || 32.8 || 67.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 
 UK || 99.1 || 0.4 || 0.1 || 0.1 || 0.3 
   || Presence of TTOs in RPO (% RPO) 
   || Have TTO || Use TTO || Does not have || Does not know || TTO not applicable 
 AL || 98.5 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.5 
 AT || 67.3 || 21.0 || 8.0 || 0.9 || 1.3 
 BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 41.7 || 0.8 
 BE || 90.1 || 4.0 || 3.0 || 0.7 || 0.1 
 BG || 24.4 || 11.9 || 21.4 || 21.4 || 3.3 
 CH || 95.8 || 1.6 || 2.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.3 || 0.0 || 1.6 
 CZ || 49.5 || 15.0 || 19.6 || 3.3 || 5.7 
 DE || 72.6 || 10.9 || 11.8 || 0.0 || 0.2 
 DK || 86.5 || 4.9 || 5.8 || 0.9 || 0.5 
 EE || 89.3 || 0.0 || 8.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 EL || 63.9 || 0.7 || 10.8 || 0.0 || 0.1 
 ES || 88.7 || 1.9 || 7.4 || 0.2 || 0.5 
 FI || 77.5 || 0.0 || 21.7 || 0.0 || 0.3 
 FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 89.0 || 6.8 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 0.3 
 HR || 74.2 || 11.9 || 8.9 || 1.3 || 0.5 
 HU || 68.8 || 1.6 || 18.8 || 1.4 || 0.2 
 IE || 96.7 || 0.9 || 1.7 || 0.0 || 0.7 
 IL || 10.2 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 5.6 
 IS || 82.0 || 10.1 || 7.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 87.5 || 0.9 || 5.6 || 0.2 || 0.1 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 79.7 || 6.8 || 2.9 || 0.0 || 10.6 
 LU || 94.8 || 0.0 || 5.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LV || 67.8 || 11.1 || 14.5 || 2.3 || 0.0 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 6.7 || 0.0 || 93.3 || 0.0 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 0.4 
 NL || 96.0 || 1.9 || 1.6 || 0.4 || 0.1 
 NO || 62.4 || 12.4 || 6.7 || 3.0 || 4.8 
 PL || 81.9 || 0.6 || 8.5 || 5.2 || 1.1 
 PT || 63.2 || 13.7 || 20.6 || 0.1 || 1.6 
 RO || 72.3 || 4.8 || 15.1 || 2.5 || 4.4 
 RS || 68.0 || 10.3 || 8.9 || 2.9 || 0.0 
 SE || 87.9 || 1.9 || 8.1 || 0.8 || 0.1 
 SI || 55.4 || 0.0 || 16.2 || 18.4 || 4.2 
 SK || 49.0 || 16.9 || 19.8 || 1.2 || 6.9 
 TR || 68.9 || 10.0 || 19.9 || 0.0 || 1.2 
 UK || 90.9 || 1.5 || 3.2 || 0.5 || 0.0 
   || Share of RPO according to the number of digital services provided (% RPO) 
   || Seven || Six || Five || Four || Three || Two || One || None 
 AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.5 || 0.0 || 1.5 || 0.0 
 AT || 3.9 || 26.0 || 11.5 || 9.6 || 37.2 || 8.9 || 0.1 || 2.8 
 BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 14.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 85.8 
 BE || 10.2 || 55.2 || 1.9 || 4.8 || 1.4 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 26.0 
 BG || 0.0 || 3.3 || 19.4 || 18.0 || 34.3 || 5.3 || 8.3 || 11.4 
 CH || 63.1 || 0.5 || 3.3 || 15.0 || 8.7 || 2.6 || 2.9 || 4.0 
 CY || 8.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.6 || 22.2 || 58.1 || 0.0 || 1.1 
 CZ || 2.1 || 8.3 || 31.8 || 1.3 || 21.0 || 16.6 || 2.8 || 16.2 
 DE || 32.8 || 22.7 || 23.5 || 8.4 || 3.1 || 1.5 || 0.3 || 7.7 
 DK || 0.3 || 10.1 || 45.1 || 15.9 || 2.6 || 20.5 || 4.9 || 0.6 
 EE || 2.4 || 0.0 || 1.1 || 78.7 || 1.3 || 0.8 || 0.0 || 15.8 
 EL || 17.8 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 10.4 || 38.8 || 2.6 || 3.1 || 26.8 
 ES || 19.8 || 16.4 || 18.4 || 26.0 || 9.9 || 3.6 || 1.7 || 4.2 
 FI || 3.7 || 65.2 || 12.9 || 0.0 || 5.3 || 12.0 || 0.2 || 0.7 
 FO || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 FR || 1.3 || 16.5 || 10.8 || 4.8 || 2.4 || 0.7 || 52.4 || 11.2 
 HR || 0.0 || 59.2 || 4.4 || 2.3 || 7.4 || 10.2 || 0.7 || 15.7 
 HU || 4.1 || 0.0 || 0.6 || 6.8 || 67.1 || 2.7 || 6.0 || 12.6 
 IE || 68.5 || 0.9 || 26.8 || 0.0 || 2.0 || 1.2 || 0.5 || 0.0 
 IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 15.8 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 84.0 
 IS || 0.0 || 77.7 || 0.0 || 1.1 || 18.2 || 0.0 || 3.0 || 0.0 
 IT || 23.3 || 14.6 || 12.8 || 21.5 || 9.5 || 12.1 || 1.2 || 5.1 
 LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LT || 31.0 || 36.7 || 6.8 || 24.4 || 0.3 || 0.8 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 51.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 4.0 || 0.0 || 45.0 
 LV || 0.0 || 9.0 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 63.3 || 19.8 || 0.0 || 7.2 
 MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 ME || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 93.3 || 6.7 
 MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 
 MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.3 || 0.3 || 0.4 || 0.0 
 NL || 7.8 || 58.6 || 22.5 || 7.7 || 0.0 || 0.8 || 1.3 || 1.2 
 NO || 1.3 || 40.5 || 28.8 || 12.3 || 1.0 || 2.9 || 1.5 || 11.8 
 PL || 24.9 || 13.5 || 5.2 || 24.8 || 2.8 || 7.9 || 3.2 || 17.7 
 PT || 5.0 || 11.5 || 69.0 || 4.4 || 9.2 || 0.2 || 0.2 || 0.6 
 RO || 10.6 || 9.2 || 49.9 || 8.7 || 5.4 || 5.4 || 7.1 || 3.6 
 RS || 0.0 || 4.8 || 39.8 || 20.8 || 18.4 || 1.3 || 4.1 || 10.8 
 SE || 5.2 || 33.8 || 1.9 || 38.5 || 3.4 || 15.4 || 0.0 || 1.8 
 SI || 3.1 || 7.8 || 23.2 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 17.7 || 0.0 || 46.4 
 SK || 23.1 || 0.0 || 9.2 || 0.0 || 13.9 || 7.1 || 15.2 || 31.4 
 TR || 11.5 || 5.7 || 7.7 || 33.8 || 34.4 || 5.7 || 1.2 || 0.0 
 UK || 0.0 || 14.8 || 13.7 || 6.9 || 38.5 || 9.4 || 11.6 || 5.3 
[1]
http://www.esrf.fr/files/live/sites/www/files/about/upgrade/documentation/BROCHURE%20IMPACT%20OF%20ESRF%20AND%20UPGRADE_ENGLISH%20VERSION_LR.pdf
[2] The results included concern only some specific aspects related to
ERA (they do not include the results on the Open Labour Market for Researchers,
which are presented in the corresponding section) , and no weight has been
attributed to the different areas, which unbalanced the results: those
countries with more actions for example on gender or knowledge transfer will
score higher only due to the consideration of more areas in the analysis.
[3] See annex for a description of the methodology 5.5. 
[4]       http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/pdf/esfri-strategy_report_and_roadmap.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none

[5] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/

[6] http://www.upr.si/fileadmin/user_upload/RK_RS/RK_RS_angleska/am509774CEE_EN_E4.pdf

[7] http://erc.europa.eu/ 
[8] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/strategy4Researcher

[9] http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp6/model-contract/pdf/fp6-public-bodies-annex5231_en.pdf

[10] http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/licensing/licensing.htm

[11] http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp6/model-contract/pdf/fp6-public-bodies-annex5231_en.pdf

[12] Source: http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents_faq.html#patent 
[13] Source : http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents_faq.html#patent 
[14] http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/annexes/h2020-wp1415-annex-h-esacrit_en.pdf 
[15] UNESCO, UIS (2012), International Standard Classification of
Education ISCED 2011, available at: http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/isced-2011-en.pdf

[16] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/Principles_for_Innovative_Doctoral_Training.pdf

[17] Source: BusinessDictionnary
[18] Source: EARTO
[19] http://www.bu.edu/datamanagement/background/whatisdata/ 
[20] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/Principles_for_Innovative_Doctoral_Training.pdf

[21]http://www.oecd.org/sti/oecdsciencetechnologyandindustryscoreboard2011innovationandgrowthinknowledgeeconomies.htm

[22]http://www.oecd.org/innovation/innovationinsciencetechnologyandindustry/oslomanualguidelinesforcollectingandinterpretinginnovationdata3rdedition.htm

[23] http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/OECDFrascatiManual02_en.pdf

1. 
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
In
Austria, research and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of
the federal level and regional strategies, complement research, technological
development and innovation (RTDI) policies and activities on national and EU
levels. Coordination between the federal and regional level is done under the
RTDI platform Austria (‘Plattform FTI-Österreich’) in the form of a semi-annual
conference. The main policy makers in the public research and development
(R&D) domains are: the Ministry of Science, Research and Economy (BMWFW)
and the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT). The BMWFW has
been taking over the tasks of the former Ministry of Science and Research
(BMWF) and the former Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth (BMWFJ) (all
references adapted to the new title). The Council for Research and Technology
Development (Rat für Forschung und Technologieentwicklung) is the federal
government’s strategic independent scientific and technological advisory body
for questions related to R&D policy. It works with the ministries on
recommendations for the medium-to long-term policy orientation.
The
main funding agencies are the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the Austrian
Research Promotion Agency (FFG) and the Austria Business Service (AWS). The FWF
covers basic research and is under the responsibility of and receives its
funding from the BMWFW. The FFG (under BMVIT and BMWFW) provides funds
dedicated mainly to applied research and thematic oriented R&D programmes.
The FFG partners with regions to complement their funding via Structural Funds.
AWS as a State-owned banking institution (under BMWFW and BMVIT) funds mainly
innovation projects in companies, supports seed financing and start-ups.      
The
Austrian Academy of the Sciences (ÖAW) is Austria's largest non-university
R&D organisation.
The
Austrian Federal Government strategy for research, technology and innovation
‘Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics,
Creating the Future’ was published in March 2011. It introduces a coordinated
vision and strategy across all ministries in charge of RTDI and identifies new
challenges. Some thematic priorities can also be extracted: climate change,
resources and quality of life and demographic change. The strategy has clear
links to the European Research Area (ERA) key priorities and plans support
measures under all of them. It also mentions international cooperation among
Austria’s priorities.             
In
2011, a Task Force of senior officials was also put in place to coordinate
activities from the strategic perspective and monitor the implementation of
this strategy. Nine inter-ministerial working groups were established, among
those one on European dimension of research agendas, one on research
infrastructure, one on knowledge transfer and one on international cooperation.
An ‘Austrian EU Action Plan’ has been developed in cooperation by BMWFW and
BMVIT. The action plan proposes more than 70 measures to optimise Austria's
research, technology and innovation (RTI) system regarding Horizon 2020, ERA,
the Innovation Union and the overall Europe-2020 strategy. It is formally up to
the government to decide which of the proposal will be implemented.
In
recent months, Austria established an ERA Observatory to bundle strategic
information, advice and coordination under a common roof. A high-level advisory
body on European research and innovation policies, called ‘ERA Council Forum
Austria’ under the chair of former ERC President Helga Nowotny, started its
work in March 2014. With the aim of improving coordination among ministries and
stakeholders, an ‘ERA Policy Forum Austria’ has been created. It should
increase awareness and consistency in the way Austria addresses sectoral
policies with high impact on RTI, in particular from a European perspective.
The Council for Research and Technology Development has the task of monitoring
the progress of the strategy’s implementation and reports to the Parliament
(National Council) on an annual basis.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Austria represented EUR 294 per inhabitant
in 2012 almost twice as much as the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per
inhabitant was EUR302. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.6% of total
government expenditures and 0.8 % of Gross Domestic Product (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in
Austria has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally,
GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Austria even when it
regressed at EU28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
public R&D funding is organised within thematic and open bottom-up
approaches, by both the FWF and the FFG. Competitive structural and thematic
R&D programmes have become increasingly important in the last years.   
The
FWF mainly funds academia. Its total grant portfolio was EUR195.2 million for
2011 and EUR196,4 million for 2012. In 2013, the grant budget was EUR202,6
million. The FFG supports business R&D and cooperative research. More than
60 % of competitive public research funds are performed by Austrian businesses.
In
2011, major steps were taken to simplify the implementation of programme
management by Austrian public funding administrations (Ministries, agencies
etc.): calls for proposals were integrated into annual schedules; common
guidelines for similar types of projects have been issued and an agreement was
reached to treat similar projects in the same way (by BMVIT, BMWFW and FFG).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 49 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
For
the two main funding agencies, FWF and FFG, overall principles for the
application, evaluation and selection procedures are detailed in the
FTE-Richtlinien (2007). Specific guidelines for the Austrian Research Promotion
Agency are regulated in the legal base FFG-Richtlinien (2008). International
peer-review principles are not mentioned as such, but results from the
implementation of the guidelines by both agencies. The FWF exclusively uses
international peer-review for the applications. Project selection criteria and
procedures adhere to principles of excellence, impartiality, transparency,
appropriateness for purpose, efficiency and speed, confidentiality, and ethical
and integrity considerations. The FFG applies specifically-tailored evaluation
criteria, according to the needs of the programme. The FFG-law stipulates that
all FFG-funding decisions have to be taken upon the principles of transparency,
impartiality, and fairness.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Public
funds in Austria are more often distributed via institutional than
project-based modes, roughly accounting for two thirds and a third,
respectively, of total funding. National public funding for the higher
education sector is mostly institutional. It is regulated in the
'Universitätsgesetz 2002' and based on performance agreements at university
level and less so for public research institutes. A revision of the
universities financing legislation (the University Structural Funds Ordinance) in
January 2013 further strengthened the trend towards institutional funding by
allocating additional money to it for 2013-2015. Institutional funds destined
for universities are a combination of three categories: funds for teaching, for
research and for infrastructure. A two-year basis for calculation applies.
Funds allocated for research are based on the number of students, a
competitively-oriented research indicator (based on, for example the number of
PhDs, project volume financed by the FWF, project volume financed by industry
or other sources) and a strategic budget depending on the societal objectives
of the universities (for example, the share of women in PhD programs,
participation in outgoing mobility programs, number of foreign graduate
students). Full implementation of the institutional funding model is foreseen
for the performance contract period 2019-2021, for period 2016-2018 up to 60 %
of university funding will be based upon this model.            
The
ÖAW, which underwent structural reforms in 2012, has concluded with BMWFW a
multi-annual performance agreement that comprises the period of 2012-2014, with
a total budget of EUR224 million for the three-year period.            
Higher
Education Institutions (HEI) have to undergo external quality assurance every
seven years. In March 2012, under the 'Quality Assurance Framework Law' the
Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation Austria was established. This
agency is responsible for external quality assurance for all types of
universities. Later in 2012, the Platform Research & Technology Policy
Evaluation (FTEVAL) published its new standards for evaluations in the field of
research, technology and innovation, with impact on future institutional
assessments and general evaluation practice in Austria in medium- and long-term.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 15.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Austria’s
trans-national and international priorities are included in the overall Federal
Government strategy for research, technology and innovation 'Becoming an
Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the
Future'.   
Austria
is also interested in improving the general standards for cross-border research
coordination.          
The
new workprogramme of the Austrian Federal Government for 2013-2018 states under
the research chapter the will to strengthen trans-national and international cooperation
by establishing of RTI-Attachés and additional Offices of Science and
Technology Austria (OSTA) in priority countries in and outside Europe.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Austria allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Austria dedicated
to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than
the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the seventh Framework
Programme, Austria's total share of participation is 3 % and the country
received 3 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR130 per
inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2,9 % of
the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011
(last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in eight of the ten
on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change (FACCE), Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for
Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years,
Better Life), Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water
Challenges for a Changing World and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local
Solutions.
In
the National Reform Programme 2014, Austria states that it plans to 'devote
particular effort to the alignment of European and national strategies within
the framework of those initiatives.'
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country also participated in a total of 87 ERA-NETs, of which 22 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in 11 ERA-NET Plus
actions - of which seven are still running - in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Austria
has at least 12 bilateral agreements with Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech
Republic, France, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, FYR of
Macedonia. Bilateral agreements, whether with MS/AC or third countries          do
not only include the federal government level, but also cooperation at university
or public research organisations (for example ÖAW) levels. Programmes serve to
fund bilateral collaborations in cases where the two national subprojects are
so closely connected that they may only be performed in conjunction with one
another.         
Austria
participates in the D-A-CH multilateral agreement between Germany, Austria and
Switzerland.   
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the
Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,
Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It
comprises 11 priority areas (PA), PA 7 pertaining to the knowledge society and
PA 2 dealing with sustainable energy issues.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
Concerning
international cooperation with third countries and regions, Austria has
recently developed the overall Federal Government strategy for research,
technology and innovation titled 'Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising
Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future' including the
sub-strategy on international cooperation dubbed 'Beyond Europe'. Based on
these strategy papers, Austria will inter alia expand its cooperation with
innovation front-runners such as the United States, selected Asian nations and
the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China and South Africa), as well
as continuing its collaboration with Central, Eastern and South-Eastern
European countries. 
Austria
has concluded several intergovernmental bilateral science and technology
(S&T) agreements as well as Memoranda of Understanding on S&T cooperation
including Argentina, China, India, the Republic of Korea,Vietnam, the Russian
Federation and Ukraine.              
Additionally,
the Commission for Development Research (KEF) at the Austrian Agency for
International Cooperation in Education and Research (OeAD) supports numerous
research partnerships between Austrian researchers and researchers from
developing countries as well as participating in the EU-funded ERAfrica
Project. Africa, Asia and Latin America.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Austria
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Austria, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is lower than the EU
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is supported within the D-A-CH multilateral agreement between Germany, Austria
and Switzerland, the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Austrian Science
Fund (FWF) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). These agencies
have agreed to apply the so called 'Lead agency' procedure, which foresees that
funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international
projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are
being performed in their respective countries (for research projects with
participants of at least two of the three countries). It also allows
researchers to move to one of those countries following a
money-follows-cooperation-line scheme, a scheme which allows small parts of a
project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in
a different country. Negotiations are on-going to include similar funding
agencies from the Netherlands or the UK. Funding agencies do not implement the
money-follows researchers scheme.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 48.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 4.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Austria allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Austria
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RI): European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) and the Institut Laue-Langevin
(ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.2 % of GBAORD to the activities
carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint
Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortia,
Austria is involved in four of the seven consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of RI of European interest involving several European countries. Austria
is hosting BBMRI-ERIC and is member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC and ESS ERIC.
In
terms of support for developing and implementating RIs, one important policy
priority outlined in the national RTDI strategy is the improvement of national
RI as well as Austria’s integration and commitments to international
infrastructures (e.g. ESFRI). Thus, this is the focus of one of the
inter-ministerial working groups of the Task Force established for its
implementation. A tentative national roadmap on research infrastructures,
partly depending on future budget availability, is part of the recent Task
Force report. In February 2014, the Austrian government released a document
called 'Austrian Research Infrastructure – Action Plan 2014-2020'. It outlines
the ESFRI infrastructures that are of central importance to the Austrian
research environment and the major benefits of participating in these projects
for the Austrian research sector which are strengthening competitiveness by
ensuring complementarity of national infrastructures, access to equipment,
knowledge and technology transfer and the structural improvement
(defragmentation) of the humanities and social sciences research landscape.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to RIs, at the end of 2011, the Austrian Council for research,
technology and development (RTD) has published specific recommendations
regarding the further improvement of national infrastructures, which includes
among other measures the establishment of a national repository for Austria
Ris. A national repository of RI was established and measures were taken to
allow its continuous improvement.         
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by Austria, access to five of them has
been funded by the European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Austria in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Austria_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 37,114 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Austria in 2011. This
represents 8.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 76.0 in Austria
compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 55 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Following
an amendment to the Universities Act, Austrian Universities must advertise
research job vacancies (for scientific and research staff) internationally, at
least EU-wide. University institutions decide autonomously on the instrument
for advertising vacancies internationally. The Ministry of Science, Research and
Economy actively promotes the EURAXESS Jobs portal via brochures, flyers, and
newspaper advertisements in order to raise awareness of the European job
database among universities and public research organisations. The Job Exchange
is a service provided by the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology
and the Austrian Research Promotion Agency, and is available online. As part of
the Talents programme, it offers a range of jobs in research and development
and innovation in Austria – from internships and PhD positions to senior posts
(some 5 500 job offers in 2013). Information is available at:
http://www.ffg.at/jobboerse.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
promotion of the ‘Charter & Code’ and broad implementation of their
principles at Austrian universities was part of the 2010-12 and 2013-2015
performance agreements with universities. In Austria, 18 universities have
signed the ‘Charter & Code’, as have three funding organisations, three
umbrella organisations, four research organisations, three universities of
applied sciences, one private university, one representative of industry and
the former Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research. The
implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ is part of the National Action Plan
for Researchers. The Medical University of Graz was the first Austrian
university to receive Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R)
acknowledgement from the European Commission. It has been followed by the FWF,
the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU) and the University
of Salzburg.
By
May 2014, five Austrian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which four had received the 'HR
Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter &
Code.
The
Austrian database for scholarships and research grants (www.grants.at),
Austria’s most comprehensive database for scholarships and research grants (in
English and German), offers an overview of approximately 1 200 funding
opportunities for incoming and outgoing researchers, graduates and students.
The Austrian Science Fund runs seminars to explain its funding procedures and
thus for researchers to present their own ideas to the reviewers of the FWF
programmes. The Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) provides
proposal-writing seminars to enhance post-doc student writing skills. The
Austrian Agency for International Cooperation in Education and Research (OeAD)
provides guidelines, recommendations, and seminars for drafting grant
proposals.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.2 in
2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
order to increase the number of doctoral graduates in science, technology,
engineering and mathematics (STEM), a number of Austrian universities are
establishing new organisational structures for doctoral training (and in
particular supervision), e.g. doctoral schools or doctoral centres. In
addition, some universities are developing new structural doctoral programmes
aimed at supplementing and broadening doctoral training. Following an amendment
to the Universities Act, doctoral training was extended to three years as of
the 2009-10 winter term in order to improve the quality of doctoral training.
In addition, universities have established new doctoral curricula and have
introduced additional measures to improve quality, skills and supervision of
doctoral training. The Doctoral Programme, a joint initiative led by
internationally-recognised scientists, facilitates work experience abroad for
researchers and offers training in support of transferable skill development.
In addition to measures aimed at improving researchers’ research proposal
writing skills, the Austrian Economic Service (Austria Wirtschaftsservice -
awsg) offers services to increase researchers’ awareness of intellectual
property rights.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU27
Member State was 18.5 % in Austria compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 8.6 % in
Austria compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 24.2 %. 
The
APART Programme awards fellowships to national and international students in
support of a post-doctoral thesis, or the continuation of a scientific project.
Third-country applicants must carry out their research project at an Austrian
research institution. The percentage of foreign researchers among APART fellows
in 2010-2012 was 18 %. In the DOC Programme PhD studies can be conducted at
universities or research institutions both in Austria and abroad. In 2011 and
2012, 15 % of the fellows conducted research at universities or research
institutions abroad. Similarly, the DOC-team Programme supports teams working
on trans-disciplinary research projects in humanities, cultural studies and
social sciences. Each team member must spend at least half a year at a research
institution abroad. As the largest post-doctoral programme for outbound
mobility for basic research in Austria, the Schroedinger Programme aims to
enable young scientists normally based in Austria to work abroad at leading
research institutions and on leading research programmes in order to gain
research experience abroad during their post-doctorat. With the possibility of
also applying for a reintegration phase, the programme aims to facilitate the
return phase for the researchers in order to reverse the brain drain from
Austria.
The
BRIDGE Programme focuses specifically on the funding of industrial research-cooperation
projects. Funded projects are those expected to build on the basic research of
scientific institutes and take them closer to potential commercialisation
through collaborative research with businesses. The projects carried out as
part of concrete research collaborations are intended to enable an effective
exchange of research results and expertise. Another aim is to foster
communication between science and industry, opening up new prospects for both
partners. The funding of collaborative projects is designed to facilitate
mutual access to each other’s expertise and help companies overcome their
apprehension about (basic) research. The COMET Competence Centre Programme aims
to develop international research excellence and expertise, and support the technological
leadership of companies to strengthen Austria as a top destination for
research. The research carried out in competence centres ranges from medium to
long term and meets high standards of quality. The programme’s priorities are
the applied orientation of top-level research and its actual implementation in
the industry sector. COMET is sponsored by the Ministry of Transport,
Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) and the Ministry of Science, Research and
Economy (BMWFW). It follows on the success of their previous competence centre
programmes. The provinces also support COMET with additional funding. The
Austrian Research Promotion Agency is responsible for managing COMET. There are
currently (Status 31 December 2013) 21 COMET K-Centres (five K2 Centres and 16
K1 Centres) as well as 24 K-Projects running with federal funding of
approximately EUR50 million per year.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Austria
has set up specific laws and actions to implement gender equality in research.
Tackling
discrimination is high on the government agenda. The new Austrian Federal
Government workprogramme for 2013-2018, under chapter 03 'Education, science,
art and culture, women' considers women careers in research (Science
sub-chapter) but also gender pay gap and other general measures (Women
sub-chapter). Austria plans to advocate 'an active equality policy at European
level with regard to economic gender equality and reconciling of work and
family life'.              
In
the course of the new reform of budget laws, gender budgeting and gender
equality were laid down in the Federal Constitutional Act (BV-G) and Federal
Budget Act (BHG). The latter provides for a balanced representation in academic
leadership positions and boards. On the basis of these laws a gender equality
objective was developed by all ministries.              
Several
acts are in place to ensure gender equality: the Charter on the Compatibility
of Family and Career, the National Action Plan (NAP) for Gender Equality in the
Labour Market, the Care Allowance Reform Act 2012 and the Care Allowance
Act.     
Since
2009, objectives to attain gender balance in leadership positions and
decision-making bodies in public research organisations and higher education
institutions were gradually put in place by the University Act. Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the country has set up a female quota for
the participation of under-represented sex in decision-making bodies of
Research Performing Organisations. The 2009 amendment of the Universities Act
stipulates a women quota of 40 % in university committees and boards. Gender
specific measures are included in the performance agreements with universities
(for example the 40 % mandatory representation of women). Austrian Universities
provide statements and figures on gender (and budget) and how  they progress on
gender equality. BMWFW evaluates progress on an annual basis using performance
indicators, including gender indicators.
The
Universities Act also contains references to establishing an organisational
unit responsible for  coordinating activities relating to gender equality and
the so-called 'Affirmative Action Plans'. Performance agreements with
universities include financial incentives for gender-specific issues and among
other things universities commit themselves to support work-life balance by
offering childcare facilities, parental leave and flexible working
hours.             
Additionally,
the 2014 National Reform Programme underlines that 'Strategic gender equality
targets have also been defined in the universities’ performance agreements',
and that it will continue to support campaigns for attracting women in
scientific careers.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 95.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
General
laws require equal treatment for women and several provisions are included to
ensure that: maternity leave is not a discriminating factor; pregnancy
automatically freezes temporary contracts; women have the right to return to an
equal position to the one held before their maternity leave and to have a
part-time position when they end their maternity leave.              
The
country has measures that support returning to work after parental leave. FWF
and ÖAW fellowship programmes allow for interruptions and extensions in case of
maternity leave.
Austria
has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in research
programmes and/or projects. All FWF programmes provide for a quota of 30 %
women scientists/scholars and this target has been achieved.
The
country provides incentives for recruiting female researchers and promoting
access of female researchers to senior positions in research-performing
organisations. The Universities Act provides for the implementation of gender
monitoring with respect to recruitment and targeted recruitment in public
research organisations and universities.       
It
has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically
support female researchers. Since 2002, several support schemes have been put
in place to support recruitment, retention and career progression of female
researchers: under the umbrella of the inter-ministerial action programme
'Women in Research and Technology', fForte: the Excellentia Programme launched
in 2005 to support women full professors; the fForte Coaching Programme
supports women in writing successful grant proposals; the ‘Laura Bassi Centres
of Excellence’ encourage women to apply for top positions; the FEMtech
programme seeks to increase female participation in industry innovation and
applied sciences at PROs. The FWF career programmes support women at the start
of their careers and to apply for full professors. 
The
Working Group on Gender and Diversity Management within the BMWFW aims to
implement diversity measures as cultural and institutional change initiatives.
In this regard, a study that focuses on how to achieve cultural and structural
change within the scientific and research community has been commissioned by
the BMWFW.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 69.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
Country has set up provisions to integrate the gender dimension in research
programmes and/or projects. FFG and FWF have included gender in research
content considerations in grant application and reporting guidelines of
specific funding instruments. In 2012 the Gender Studies Association Austria
was established to develop gender studies at universities as well as higher
education institutions.  
Certain
FEMtech R&D grants target gender-specific innovation since 2010, e.g.
accounts for gender differences and its implications for product design.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 93.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 63.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Austria is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
Austria
supports open access in the frame of the performance agreements with
universities. Activities concerning open access policies are up to individual
research-performing organisations (RPOs) and research funding institutions. In
January 2010 the Austrian Rector's Conference (UNIKO) published its
recommendations to enhance open access policies in Austria. In 2012, under the
organisational umbrella of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and UNIKO, research
funders and performers have organised themselves into the 'Open Access Network
Austria' to coordinate open access activities and make nationwide
recommendations in the field. Additionally, since 2007 research and funding
institutions from Austria, Switzerland and Germany cooperate in a joint
project/online platform to improve information, knowledge and discuss open
access.
Open
access was enshrined as a topic of the future at national level as the Austrian
Council for Research and Technology Development (RFTE) articulated open access
in their Strategy 2020, that all public research results in Austria shall be
freely accessible on the Internet by 2020.
Open
access is one the key priorities of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the main
funding for basic research in Austria.
FWF
has a mandatory policy on open access, including towoards data where legally
possible, with green and gold open access as equivalent options. Similarly, the
Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW) and the University of Graz have developed an
institutional open access policy. All other universities will follow.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data this is legally included, where possible into open access
for publications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 18.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations making publicly funded scientific research data systematically
available online and free of charge, is lower than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
With
respect to repositories, the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW), the University
of Vienna, the Austrian Library Network LTD have created a repository.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private
sectors, Austria has embedded academia-industry cooperation among the
objectives of the 2011 Austrian Federal Government strategy for research,
technology and innovation 'Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials,
Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future'. However, the country has not
developed a knowledge transfer strategy. The adoption of the strategy was
followed by an inter-ministerial working group 'knowledge transfer and
start-ups' and introduced improved tax measures in 2012.
The
Austrian RTI strategy aims to improve and stimulate the level of collaboration
between universities, public research organisations and the economic sector.
For this purpose the Austrian RTI strategy promotes the establishment of
knowledge transfer centers. Knowledge transfer between universities, other
research organisations and the private sector will be promoted within three
virtual regional Knowledge Transfer Centres and within a virtual thematic
Knowledge Transfer Centre in the field of life sciences. The new BMWFW funding
programme should offer incentives for Austrian state universities and defined
research institutes to use strategic partnerships within the framework of the
regional and thematic knowledge transfer centres to jointly utilise the
potential that has been built up in recent years in the field of knowledge and
technology transfer and thus to further increase both quality and
professionalism. Optimised transfer processes should furthermore enable
universities in particular to participate to an even greater extent in the
innovation process.         
The
new Austrian Federal Government workprogramme for 2013-2018 states under the
research chapter the willingness to safeguard knowledge transfer, increase
cooperation between science and business and develop and implement a national
strategy for intellectual property.         
In
the ongoing performance agreements with universities and the ÖAW assurance is
given that reliable and sustainable intellectual property and utilisation
strategies will be developed to enable partners from the economy to formulate
long-term research targets.
There
are specific programmes for transferring knowledge, creating and supporting
spin-offs and supporting intellectual property rights (IPRs) at the level of
universities and research organisations, and specific placement schemes for
young researchers in industry. The general programme of the FFG has remained
Austria’s most important source of public funding for R&D carried out by
industry in terms of funding budget, efforts to promote R&D in all economic
sectors and industries, areas of technology, and sizes of companies. Some
examples of FFG programmes fostering academia-industry cooperation are COMET,
COIN, BRIDGE, AplusB or uni:invent. The Christian Doppler Research Association
provides also for academia-business cooperation within its programmes.
Knowledge transfer measures are considered effective as they have led to a high
level of transfer activities and Austria ranks third among Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in this respect. 
In
2010, a national contact point (NCP) was designated at the BMWFW. The NCP's
tasks include coordinating measures regarding knowledge transfer between public
research organisations and the private sector, including tackling
trans-national issues, in liaison with similar contact points in other Member
States. The project Intellectual Property Agreement Guide (IPAG) is funded by
the NCP. The aim of IPAG is to support universities, public research
institutions and also enterprises in the professional handling of intellectual
properties (IP) by drafting model agreements. A set of model contracts is made
available helping the most appropriate model contracts to be selected. The use
of theses model contracts is voluntary (www.ipag.at). The project is an
important contribution to enhance trust and confidence between all relevant
stakeholders and should simplify the legal and administrative processes. As
part of efforts to generate greater public awareness of the link between
science and industry, the Phönix Award of the BMWFW  is given to young
university spin-offs from universities and public research organisations. It
aims to enhance the visibility of the excellent scientific outcomes of Austrian
universities.
Strategic
partnerships between academia and industry are supported by funding
organisations in Austria, for example the FFG funds the Laura Bassi Centres of
Expertise and the thematic programme “Leuchttürme eMobilität” (Lighthouses of
E-mobility).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 82.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 85.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is similar to the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in FTE) is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
With
regards to access and usage of e-infrastructures and digital research services,
most Austrian academic institutions (more than 80 %) are part of the Austrian
Academic Computer Network (ACOnet -'Österreichisches akademisches
Computernetz') which is the National Research and Education Network (NREN) run
by the University of Vienna. This is essential to make digital services
possible. However, Austria does not have a strategy for implementating the
Digital European Research Area (ERA).
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Austria
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) Partners' federations, through ACOnet, which offers its members
high-performance access and support services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 28.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 94 research performing organisations in Austria answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 40.1% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011). One important
research performing organisation is not included.
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Austria shows that 21.1 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 51.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 27.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 85.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 10.6 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 3.7 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
For
the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it
should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by some of the
ministries without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence
the percentage is relatively high compared to official figures. Moreover one of
the big funding organisations in Austria could not make a distinction between
project based or institutional funding.
For
the indicators on Open Access the non-response rate was high, while a high
percentage ofof organisations that did reply perform applied research. These
factors explain the relatively low scores on Open Access.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Austrian EU Action Plan || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Reform of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW) || 2012 || X ||   
 Quality Assurance Framework Law establishing the Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation Austria || 2012 || X ||   
 The Austrian Research, Technological Development and Innovation Strategy “Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future" || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Updated evaluation standard published by the semi-public Platform Research & Technology Policy Evaluation (FTEVAL) || 2012 || X ||   
 Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) Revised university financing provisions || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Support for European initiatives e.g. the European Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan (national representatives level)  and for the participation of national researchers || 2013 || X || X 
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions 
 Establishment of FTI-Attachés and additional Offices of Science and Technology Austria (OSTA) || 2014 || X || X 
 Beyond Europe Die Internationalisierung Österreichs in Forschung, Technologie und Innovation über Europa hinaus || 2013 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Joint Programming Initiatives - Austria is leading the JPI Urban Europe and is participating in 7 more JPIs || 2013 || X || X 
 Article 185, ERA-nets and ERA-nets plus || 2013 || X || X 
 New scientific clusters launched and evaluation exercise passed in the Danube strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Establishment of a repository of research infrastructures in Austria || 2011 ||   ||   
 Draft national roadmap for for the building of new infrastructures and link to ESFRI. || 2011 ||   ||   
 Participation in ESFRI Initiatives || 2013 || X || X 
  Austrian Research Infrastructure – Action Plan 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 National  EURAXESS portal ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Implementation of the provision of the Scientific Visa Directive 2005/71/EC and recommendations 2005/762/EC and 2005/761/EC ||   ||   ||   
 Recognition ("Nostrifizierung") of foreign diploma or training qualifications || 2011 ||   ||   
 The brainpower austria programme; the Career Grants Programme; various grants and scholarships ||   ||   ||   
 Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) (revision of/amendment to the original 2002 law, Bundesgesetz BGBl. I Nr. 81/2009) || 2009 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 FWF structured doctoral programmes Hertha Finberg Programme and Elise Richter Programme ||   ||   ||   
 Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) (revision of/amendment to the original 2002 law) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Federal Constitutional Act (BV-G) and Federal Budget Act (BHG) Federal Equal Treatment Act and equivalents at regional level || 2013 || X || X 
 The Charter on the Compatibility of Family and Career, The National Action Plan (NAP) for Gender Equality in the Labour Market, The Care Allowance Reform Act 2012 and The Care Allowance Act National policy on gender equality || 2013 || X || X 
 Working Group on Gender and Diversity Management || 2013 || X || X 
 inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), industry and PROs branch (FEMtech) || 2002 ||   ||   
 Inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), industry and PROs branch (FEMtech) || 2002 ||   ||   
 inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), schooling branch Educational gender initiatives by BMWF ||   ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open Access Network Austria || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Overarching laws on the research system Inter-ministerial working group “knowledge transfer and start-ups” ||   ||   ||   
 Tax incentives for research || 2012 || X ||   
 Christian Doppler Research Association ||   ||   ||   
 General Programme of the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) - support of KT and OI || 2011 ||   ||   
 Establishment of a national contact point (NCP) for IP management || 2010 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 ACOnet “Österreichisches akademisches Computernetz” - member of GÉANT ||   ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN || 213 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
research and innovation (R&I) policy is designed and implemented in a
multi-level governance framework involving the Federal Government and
autonomous regional/community governments. 
The
Federal Government has competence for the federal scientific institutes,
intellectual property (IP) law, standardisation, fundamental metrology, nuclear
research, corporate taxation, employment legislation and social security. The
communities are competent for matters related to individuals including
scientific research and (higher) education, and the Community Scientific
Institutes. The regions are competent for territorial matters such as energy,
environment, and economic support, thus including innovation, applied and
industrial research, science parks, and technology transfer. The three Belgian
regions (Brussels-Capital, Flanders and Wallonia) design policies that suit the
specific needs of their business sectors for innovation and that are tailored
to optimise the potential of their higher education research capacities. The
Belgian German-speaking community does not have a research policy.
At
Federal level, the Federal Office for Science Policy (BELSPO) provides project
funding. Moreover, the Federal level supports the federal research institutes.
In Flanders, the Flemish Government defines policy orientations and provides
institutional funding to higher education institutions (HEIs). Its main funding
instrument is the Special Research Fund (BOF) allocated depending on defined
criteria (BOF-key). Project-based funding is managed by two agencies: the
Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO) and the Institute for the Promotion of
Innovation by Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT). FWO stimulates
fundamental research, whereas IWT promotes innovation through science and technologies.
The Hercules Foundation stimulates the use of a large research infrastructure, 
which  proposals can be forwarded to.  In Wallonia, industrial research funding
and funding for academic, public or not-for-profit research centres are managed
by the General Operational Directorate for Economy, Employment and Research,
called DGO6. In the French Community, the National Scientific Research Fund
(F.R.S-FNRS) manages competitive project funding. Research and development
(R&D) investments are long-term secured and multi-annual research and
development and innovation (R&D&I) strategies are implemented at 
different government levels.
The
country has adopted an R&I strategy on a regional level. 
In
Flanders, the regional R&D and innovation strategy is based on the
minister’s policy note on innovation that covers the priorities and initiatives
for the five year governing period, which is elaborated by annual policy
letters. In adittion, there are related initiatives such as e.g. the Concept
note on Innovation Centre Flanders (2011). At the overall policy level of
Flanders, the Flanders in Action (FiA) future plan aims to make Flanders one of
the top five EU regions by 2020, and includes targets on research. The amended
Flemish Parliament Act on Innovation from 2012 sets out the legal basis for
subsidies for special research funds, and legal anchoring of the young
researchers support programme. Belgium has a Country Specific Recommendation:
'Restore competitiveness […] by promoting innovation through streamlined
incentive schemes and reduced administrative barriers'.
In
Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, the Research Strategy 2011-2015
follows up on their willingness for closer cooperation between the different
policy levels (cfr. Marshall Plan2.Green). This document sets out eight
strategic objectives (including reiterating the 3 % objective), identifies five
priority thematic areas and includes a detailed plan of action for meeting the
objectives. Competitive funding is implemented through calls for proposals
connected to the research strategy priorities (i.e.GREENTIC, Competitiveness
Poles, RELIABLE programme, etc). The Wallonia Marshall Plan2.Green allocates
funds to competitiveness clusters with support to public-private partnerships
and projects related to the research strategy priorities (information and
communication technologies, sustainable development, ageing and health).
Additional
competitive funds are available from the Strategic Fundamental Research fund,
hosting the virtual research institutes for life sciences and sustainable
development.
In
terms of R&D&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays
for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Belgium represented EUR 224 per
inhabitant in 2012, above the EU28 level (EUR179). In 2012, total GBAORD
corresponded to 1.2 % of total government expenditures  and 0,7 % of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
However,
GBOARD does not show the complete picture for Belgium. Apart from direct
support to R&D indirect support by fiscal measures (tax benefits) plays a
substantial role in Belgium. The sum of direct and indirect support has
increased over the period 2007-2012 and is close to 1.1 % of GDP in 2012.
Fiscal measures for R&D and innovation in Belgium amount to around EUR 1,1
billion in 2012.
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Belgium has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of
R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in  Belgium, measured as
percentage of public government expenditure evolved more negatively than the
negative evolution observed in the EU27. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has
regressed in Belgium but less than the evolution observed in EU28.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
•           In
October 2012, the Council of Ministers (federal government) approved the launch
of the first phase (2012-2017) of the recurrent Research Framework Programme
BRAIN-be. The programme, which mobilises EUR18 million/year, is organised
around six themes, open to the participation of researchers and institutions
from other countries on a co-funding basis and supports two types of research projects:
network projects and pioneer projects.
•           The
Research Strategy 2011-2015 remains the main policy document: it allows for
public private partnership (PPP) funding and the support of several calls for
projects connected to its priority themes (GREENTIC, competiveness poles,
RELIABLE programme, Employment-Environment Alliance etc.)
•           In
the Wallonia's Marshall Plan 2.Green, funding is allocated to competitiveness
clusters, with additional support for PPPs and to R&D programmes on
subjects linked to the Research Strategy for, in particular, ICT, the
environment and sustainable development, ageing and health.
•           Through
the Fundamental Strategic Research Fund, additional funds were made available
for fundamental strategic research, hosting the virtual research institutes for
life sciences (continuation, EUR6 million per year) which already funds
research through competitive calls and sustainable development (creation, EUR5
million per year). The fund will also accommodate the Walloon Institute for
Sustainable Development.
•           The
Walloon Government asked for 22 approved research centres to be brought
together into seven institutes, in order to simplify the landscape of these
research centres and to guarantee cohesion among the subjects handled within
them. A body called WAL-TECH, tasked with ensuring the visibility of the
institutes and management of internal collaboration will oversee these
institutes. The objective is to increase the service provided to businesses, in
particular small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs), wishing to improve their
process or to develop new products.
•           In
the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, block funding for HEIs is allocated on the
basis of the number of students and full time equivalent (FTE) researchers. The
allocation of block funding is not based on scientific performance indicators
such as bibliometrics. 
•           In
the Flemish Community, additional funding for universities is also distributed
based on an allocation key, which is partially based on scientific output
indicators.
•           The
Innovatiedecreet (Flemish Parliament Act on Innovation) was modified, whereby
three elements were added: conditions for the support of the higher education
sector (good governance, strategic planning, gender balance, reporting and
science communication), the legal basis for subsidies for the special research
funds, the legal anchoring of the programme for the support of young
researchers.
•           In
2011, a new support programme for young researchers was implemented in the
Flemish Community. Since the budgetary year of 2013, this annual subsidy of
EUR4 million has been embedded legally. 
•           Starting
from 1 January 2012 a new agreement between the Research Foundation Flanders
(FWO) and the Flemisch Governement was put in place.  Based on this agreement
FWO can support for the next five years basic research performed at Flemish
universities and institutes.
•           In
the Flemish Community, the period of the legal basis for funding from the BOF
ended in 2012. A new decision has been approved that builds on the existing legislation,
and also alters some specifications. The funding from BOF aimed at universities
includes a number of conditions that refer to the autonomy of the universities.
Also, a number of parameters were changed for the distribution of the budget
among universities. There will be guaranteed minima for small and middle-sized
universities. Finally, a number of gender mesures are included to stimulate the
balance between the sexes in academic research and  actively involve more women
. 
•           After
concluding new long-term agreements with the Flemish strategic research centres
VIB (biotechnology), IMEC (nanotechnology), iMinds (ICT) for the period
2012-2016, the Flemish Community also cconcluded with VITO, after an evaluation
by international experts, a new multi-annual covenant. During the period
2014-2018, VITO will annually receive a grant of a minimum of EUR39 million.
VITO should become/remain an internationally renowned research organisation in
the areas of environment, energy and materials, and stimulate an attractive
innovation climate for companies from Flanders.
•           The
concept note 'Innovatiecentrum Vlaanderen' from 2011 elaborated a basis for a
more flexible approach of thematic-oriented innovative centres at the
initiative of the industry, the so-called 'Lichte Structuren' (innovation
platforms). A number of existing excellence centres as well as new centres
(e.g. FISCH for sustainable chemisrty) are being supported under the new
legislative framework. Other new initiates are the test gardens or living labs
supported by IWT, e.g. on care innovation space Flanders, or on social
innovation factory.  
•           For
2013, within the implementation of Creative Wallonia, actions will be continued
and strengthened and new actions will be launched: 
-
Launch of a tool for diagnosis of innovation potential for SMEs. 
-
Creation of Creative Labs in two Teacher Training HEIs to test the possibility
of extending the tool and see if eventually all pupils of basic teaching could
benefit from new approaches in this subject. 
-
Creation of one or more Living Lab/Fablab: a feasibility study is underway. 
-
Fulfilment in the first semester of an assessment of the Creative Wallonia
Plan.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 45.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are arranged at regional level. In
Flanders, the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) calls on international
experts to evaluate all applications, both fellowships and projects. These
procedures are based on the European Science Foundation's (ESF) European Peer
Review Guide. Applicants provide a list of ten possible referees out of which
the FWO randomly contacts referees until at least two international peer review
reports are available. Specific regulations on External Peer Reviews are in
place to make sure that there is no conflict of interest between the applicant
and the referee. Efforts for avoiding, detecting and punishing conflicts of
interest have been further intensified since 2012, which resulted in a
significant lower amount of conflicts.
Projects
submitted under calls for proposals organised by the Walloon Region are also
evaluated separately by at least two foreign experts.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding based on institutional assessment is regularly applied in Flanders and
seldom at the Federal level and Wallonia.
In
the Flemish Community, additional funding for universities is also distributed
based on an allocation key, which is partially based on scientific output
indicators such as the numbers of completed PhDs, Mas and the volume of third-
party findings. Furthermore there are performance contracts between ministries
and universities, formula-based funding etc. 
The
Flemish Special Research Fund (BOF) of  the Research Foundation Flanders is
solely meant for fundamental research in universities in the shape of either
projects or mandates and does not have any thematic focus.
In
the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, block funding for HEIs is allocated on the
basis of the number of students and FTE researchers – the allocation of block
funding is not allocated based on scientific performance indicators such as
bibliometrics. Nonetheless some additional public funding tools for the HEIs,
such as the Actions de recherche concertées (ARC) and the Fonds spéciaux de la
recherche (FSR) are based on competitive peer reviewing procedures and take the
excellence of the research production into account.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 46.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and the
support institutional assessment for  allocating  institutional funding is
higher than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Belgium allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Belgium
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
higher than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme, the share of participation of Belgium in total participation is 5% and
the country received 4.8% of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR
157 per inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 5
% of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011
(last available data) (EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in 10 of the 10
on-going initiatives [coordinating 0 of them]. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better
Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting
Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy
and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local
Solutions.
Belgium
is involved in four Article169/185 initiatives (Ambient Assisted Living,
European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, EMRP and
Eurostars),
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 86 ERA-NETs, of which 26 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in seven ERA-NET
Plus actions of which four are still running in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Flanders
is active in several EU Interreg projects in future-oriented domains. Examples
are BioBase Europe (bioeconomy), NanoSensEU (nanotechnology) or Waterstofregio
(Hydrogen Region, a finalist of the EUROSTARS AWARD 2012.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy.  
Several
bilateral agreements reinforce cooperation. These agreements are signed at
Federal level or Community level. At Federal level, agreements exist with
Bulgaria, China, Poland, Russia, Vietnam. Wallonia-Brussels signed agreements
with Argentina and the Flemish Community via FWO with Brazil, Ecuador, Quebec,
Vietnam, South Africa, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Slovenia. The FWO started in
2012 with a new Pegasus program for postdoctoral fellowships to attract
researchers from abroad. Exchange Agreements with the FWO and international
partners have entered into force with research councils from South Korea,
Turkey and Mexico. In August 2013, Belgium was involved in 125 joint calls
related to EU joint research agendas. Moreover, bilateral agreements are also
implemented through yearly joint calls.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Belgium
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the organisations declared that they did
not receive funding from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is not supported as such. However, Belgium and its Communities develop
cooperation with other EU and non-EU countries to facilitate cross border
interoperability. The implementation guides of these agreements apply to each
bilateral call for proposal and set the common priorities. The crossborder
interoperability and mutual recognition mechanism is facilitated in the case of
the Lead Agency process implemented in Flanders with Luxembourg, the
Netherlands and Slovenia. The key features of the Lead Agency system in are:
•           The
support to joint projects for a maximum duration of three years.
•           Thematic
areas are defined by the agreements.
•           The
objective of these agreements is to enhance the cooperation between the
scientists of signatory countries.
•           The
proposal is evaluated by the Lead Agency only, according to national rules. The
partner funding organisation accepts the evaluation results as a basis for its
decision process.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 46.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Belgium allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is lower than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Belgium
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), The European
Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) and Institute Laue-Langevin (ILL). In
2012, the country contributed 1.7% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by
CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre
(JRC) (Eurostat).
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Belgium is involved in four of the seven consortia which adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries. Belgium is member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, ESS ERIC and
Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-ERIC).
In
terms of support for  developing and implementing Research Infrastructures (RI)
in Belgium, there is an ongoing national debate on the approach for 
participating in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures
(ESFRI) roadmap with a clear division of responsibilities and guiding rules.
The ministers in charge of research are debating a national approach regarding
the participation in the ESFRI roadmap with a clear division of
responsibilities and guiding rules. Flanders is co-operating in five ESFRI
projects (ICOS, LIFEWATCH, ESSurvey, SHARE, PRACE) over 20 to 25 years, for a
budget of EUR 3.5 million in 2012. It has allocated a supplementary budget of
EUR 5 million euro to the Hercules Foundation for special research
infrastructure, aimed at supporting the participation of Flemish actors in the
ESFRI-ERIC initiatives. Proposals from consortia of Flemish researchers were
evaluated in 2012 within the context of a general assessment of a potential
participation of Flanders at the construction and exploitation of the INSTRUCT,
EMBRC, ANAEE en DARIAH projects. For four ESFRI projects (BBMRI, EATRIS, ECRIN,
ELIXIR), the evaluation of the proposal and consequent possible Flemish
participation will be finalised in 2014. The Flemish Government also awared
support to the Grand Accelerateur National d'Ions Lourds (GANIL) in Caen
(France), as a one-off input for the setup of the 'High Resolution Separator'
of SPIRAL2. 
The
Wallonia-Brussels Federation and Wallonia approved their participation to the
same projects in addition to PRACE (EUR 4.4 million are given by Wallonia for
the participation in the PRACE project in 2011) and BBMRI, for a budget of EUR
6 million in 2012.
Some
EUR 5.8 million have been jointly allocated by Wallonia and the
Wallonia-Brussels Federation to insert teams of researchers in the European
infrastructures of the ESFRI Roadmap (PRACE, SHARE, LIFE WATCH, ICOS, BBMRI and
ESSurvey.5).
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to RIs among the research infrastructures coordinated by BE,
access to five of them has been funded by the European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Belgium in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Belgium_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 42 686 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Belgium in 2011. This
represents 8.8 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per 1000 researchers in the public sector was 44.1 in Belgium compared
with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.
In
2012, 65% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Recruitment
policies are a matter for academic autonomy, but the Federal State encourages
institutions to recruit as openly as possible. However, the traditions of some
institutions and linguistic laws can be seen as barriers to the openness of the
recruitment process. The Wallonia-Brussels Federation’s Fonds de la Recherche
scientifique (FRS-FNRS) has reformed its recruitment system throughout the
selection process. In detail, the reform eliminates the age criterion formerly
applied to applicants for FRS-FNRS mandates, provides pre-defined evaluation
criteria and feedback to the candidates, develops an evaluation procedure for
selecting of projects that involves more external experts from outside the 
Wallonia-Brussels Federation, advertises the calls for candidates and the
mechanisms for obtaining a mandate in FRS-FNRS/Associated Funds more widely on
different internet portals (FRS-FNRS, EURAXESS, etc). A renewed Internet portal
has also been created, containing information of better quality on the FRS-FNRS
procedures.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
At
Federal level, the BELSPO endorsed the Charter & Code in 2011. All
strategic research centres and universities in Flanders have acknowledged and
implemented the Charter & Code principles. In the Wallonia-Brussels
Federation, the EURAXESS Rights Group (made up of university representatives),
the FRS-FNRS and the Walloon administration have agreed on a communication plan
for the implementation of the Charter & Code. In addition, higher education
institutions (via the CGHE - Conseil général des Hautes Ecoles and the
Interface ADISIF-Entreprises, a service centre for research centres and higher
education institutions and research centres have been invited to participate in
the initiative.
By
May 2014, 15 Belgian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 11 had received the HR Excellence
in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
The
2012 funding agreements between the Flemish government (Ministry of Innovation)
and three strategic Research Centres (IMEC, VIB and iMINDS V.Z.W.), foresees
that the research centres must have a coherent Human Resources policy (on
recruitment, career development, salary, training and working conditions),
should introduce a clear non-discrimination policy and respect the principles
of the Charter & Code for recruitment. The agreements contain details of
the funding envisaged as well as the duties and rights of the beneficiaries.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per 1000 population aged 25 to 34 years old
was 1.5 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and
an EU average of 1.7.
The
Flemish Community finances the Support Programme for Young Researchers with a
yearly budget of EUR 4 million. The Programme targets young researchers at
doctoral and postdoctoral level, providing them with training, career
development incentives, and support for participating in international events
and job fairs. In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, measures to improve
researchers’ employment skills and competencies are taken individually by the
universities and doctoral schools.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU27
Member State was 14.2% in Belgium compared to 18.4% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 21.0 % in Belgium
compared to 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 24.2 %. 
The
Back to Belgium grants and the post-doc fellowships of the federal government
as well as the Methusalem and Odysseus Programmes of the Flemish community and
the Ulysses Programme of Wallonia-Brussels Federation target talented
researchers to come/remain in Belgium and perform their research activities.
They are designed to promote the reintegration (and long-term stay) and use of
the skills acquired during a post-doctorat stays abroad of highly-qualified
researchers (Belgians, or foreigners who have stayed at least three years in
Belgium for studies), who have been working in another country for at least two
years.
In
the Flemish Community, the Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology
(IWT) Innovation mandates are set up with the objective of connecting the
academic and the industrial world, and stimulating postdoctoral researchers to
improve their skills in maximising the value of their research and to develop
their careers, taking a step towards industry. Inter-sectoral mobility is
encouraged during the fellowship. There are innovation mandates leading to the
establishment of a spin-off company (so-called spin-off mandates) and those
involving cooperation with existing companies. The annual budget is some EUR2
to 3 million. Approximately 40 mandates are granted yearly. In the
Wallonia-Brussels Federation (FWB), one of the objectives of the Marshall Plan
2.Green is to encourage enterprise competitiveness and attractiveness and
promote research and innovation, in close linkage with enterprises. In
addition, the Wallonia-Brussels Federation intends, as part of Marshall 2.Green
(2009-2014), to promote the recognition of the years preparing for a doctorate
as relevant job experience in the public sector (in French speaking Belgium),
so that these years can be taken into account in the salary scale of the young
civil servants/doctorate holders. This proposal has been approved by the
governments of Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation and is under the
responsibility of the Minister of Public Service.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Belgium
has set up specific laws or actions for implementating EU legislation in the
field of research.  The country has set up a gender equality strategy in
research institutions.
There
are essentially soft measures launched at Federal level and by the Flemish and
French Communities in terms of gender equality and gender mainstreaming in
research. In Flanders, an action plan on Gender Equality in academia was
adopted in 2012. The Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers adopted in
2011 also contains several orientations to improve gender balance in the
research community.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 85.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations which that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
country has measures supporting return after parental leave.
At
Federal level, and in the Flemish and French Communities, permanent researchers
enjoy the same rights for maternity leave as all employees. They also provide
mechanisms for the suspension of the grants during maternity leave.
The
country provides incentives for recruiting female researchers. 
Parental
leave:
In
addition to social security provisions (including maternity leave provisions),
the Walloon Government ensures that all researchers enjoy the same rights to
grant extension and alternative incomes during maternity leave. The provisions
are applicable to researchers with fixed-term contracts as well as grant
beneficiaries.
The
FRS-FNRS allows for an extension of a mandate or a grant when a fixed-term
mandate or a grant is suspended due to maternity, paternal or adoption leave,
for a period equal to that of the suspension. A replacement income is then
provided by the healthcare body (as is also the case for open-ended mandates)
and a complement is provided by the FRS-FNRS to compensate for the loss of
income.
The
FWO for example extends the fellowship of female researchers with one year to
compensate for the pregnancy leave. In Flanders, this follows a decision from
the Flemish Government dated 13 July 2007 on setting up a quota of a maximum of
two thirds of one sexes in boards that advice government or individual
ministers. This applies for example to the internal scientific advisors of the
Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT).
Balanced
participation between men and women:
The
Flemish action plan on Gender Equality in academia and the Wallonia-Brussels
Partnership for Researchers were followed by actions such as the joint
interuniversity master Gender Studies established by the five Flemish
universities.
The
Collaboration agreement with the Flanders Scientific Research Fund (FSR)
2012-2016 specifically mentions the need for more (female) researchers, more
international researchers and better research conditions in Flanders.
At
the end of May 2012 the  Flemish’ inter-university Council (VLIR) submitted the
Actieplan (Action Plan) Gender Hoger Onderwijs (Action Plan Gender Higher
education) to ensure that gender policy at universities is developed from the
bottom up. The Flemish Interuniversity Council (Vlaamse Interuniversitaire
Raad/VLIR) set up the Gender at Universities high-level action group. The group
aims to improve the gender balance among professors, researchers and students
by a gender action plan at the level of the universities. In the course of
2013, this action plan will be translated into an interuniversity charter on
gender equality that will contain obligatory clauses.
The
new legislation regarding the research funding through the special research
funds (valid from 1 January 2013) pays a lot of attention to the gender balance
in the universities: 
-
          One of the performance indicators used to calculate the sum per
university is a diversity parameter that looks at the number of female
researchers at postdoctoral and permanent level
-
If one of the sexes at postdoctoral and permanent level (per faculty)is under
represented, in recruitment procedures with equal candidates priority must be
given to the underrepresented sex.
-
Administrative boards, research councils and selection juries must be gender
balanced.
-
The headmasters of the universities of the Flemish Community are required to
submit (by early 2014) a proposal on the actions to be taken in favour of the
gender balance. 
-
Labour law and rules are not only affecting researchers but all other labour
market participants. In this respect, the Government Agreement of 1 December
2011, the basis for the new federal government, states the extension of
anonymous curriculum vitae for applications in the public sector (first round).
A specific law will also be established concerning equal pay.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the European Research Area (ERA) compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of
research performing-organisations implementing recruitment and promotion
policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
There
seems to be no policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 45.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations
that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the country has set up targets for the
participation of the under represented sex in decision making bodies of
Research Performing Organisations.
The
Flemish action plan on Gender Equality in academia and the Wallonia-Brussels
Partnership for Researchers require a better gender balance in committees.
However, they do include neither identified target nor mechanisms.
See
also the new legislation regarding research funding through the special
research funds (valid from 1 January 2013): 
Administrative
boards, research councils and selection juries must be gender balanced.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 34.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, no gender-balanced recruitment committees
for leading researchers in research-performing organisations could be
identified.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Belgium is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, Belgium has a proactive policy on open access
to scientific publications:
-
In 2007, Belgian public funding organisations signed the Berlin Declaration on
Open Access. 
-
          In October 2012, the ministers of Science and Research at federal
level and from each Community signed a Declaration on open access in Brussels
in which they agreed to make open access the default for all Belgian research
output. 
-
The main funding agencies (FWO and F.R.S.-FNRS) are obliged to self-archive all
articles coming from research funded by them.
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, according to OpenAire Belgian fiche FWO is studying an
obligation for research that it funds to deposit relevant raw datasets.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 50.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, The DRIVER project led by the University of Ghent
played an important role to promote open access awareness in the scientific
community and among repository managers. It was followed by other initiatives,
in particular from the University of Liège.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Belgium has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. However, on
the Community and regional level open circulation of knowledge between
companies and research organisations is supported in various ways. 
Several
programmes are implemented to facilitate knowledge transfer between public and
private sector. Nearly all the items identified in this report are covered.
However, distinct measures are established by each Community, and an item can
be covered by one and not by the other, as described below.
Funding
organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities,
a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programmes 
Strategic
partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Belgium
o          Support
to networking and communication activities with the private sector (e.g.
academia-private sector networks, alumni networks, platforms, job fairs).
The
French Community PRODOC programme promotes exchanges between researchers and
private sector via events such as job forums. 
o          Support
to the implementation of research training agreements with private sector
organisations
In
Flanders, IWT Innovation mandates are set up with the objective of connecting
the academic and the industrial world.
o          Support
to structured programmes for placements in the private sector (e.g.
internships) for researchers.
In
Wallonia, the programme FIRST Entreprise provides support to companies to train
young researchers. In Flanders, the Baekeland programme funds doctoral projects
carried out at a Flemish university in close cooperation with a company.
o          Support
to the implementation of bilateral agreements with non-public organisations for
specific projects (e.g. private sector, including the Industry and voluntary
sector).
Both
Communities support technology transfer offices (TTOs) that must stimulate
exchanges with the private sector.
Moreover,
Flanders and Wallonia also develop and support innovation platforms responsible
for competence poles to stimulate cooperation between public research and
industry.
In
Flanders, the IWT has adapted the selection criteria for the annual call for
VIS-trajectories. The aim is to increase the success rate of VIS-trajectories
that also target innovation followers. Moreover, a specific (pilot) call was
launched in 2013 for VIS-trajectories for innovation followers (VIS-trajectIV).
The aim of this is to increase the transfer of innovation to the market (16
projects were selected for support of in total EUR4.6 million).
In
Wallonia, a main action to strengthen relations between public research and
academia is the establishment of public-private partnerships (PPPs) for
R&D. It supports projects financed by the region, private sector and public
research organisations on strategic research for companies. The aim is to
foster synergies between private and public research.
o          Support
to intellectual property right (IPR) including patents.
In
Wallonia, financial support to patent is provided to public research
organisations since they can demonstrate the potential economic value of the
patent. 
o          Support
the creation, management and/or follow-up of spin-offs.
Wallonia,
Brussels and Flanders established specific funding programmes to support
spin-offs: Venture cap for spin-off and FIRST Spin-off in Wallonia; Spin-off in
Brussels; and in Flanders there exist the Innovation Mezzanine, the SOFI fund,
Vinnof, and ARKimedes fund (managed by PMV).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 69.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support
national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and Private
Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, no research personnel whose primary
occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) could be
identified.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with implementation of the Digital ERA, Belgium has not set up a
strategy for its implementation. However, the country has implemented a
research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.
At
Federal level, BELSPO has established an operational unit named BELNET
responsible for the design and network management and research education in
Belgium. Nearly 200 institutions representing more than 650 000 users are
connected to BELNET. It provides on-request services such as a platform for
e-collaboration or video conferencing. At Community level, Flanders developed
virtual labs in the areas of medicine and new materials.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 65.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Belgium
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. It was a member of an identity
federation in 2013. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to
enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity,
authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners'
federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 35 research performing organisations in Belgium answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 19.2% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Belgium shows that 24.1 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 55.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 20.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 87.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 11.4 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.7 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Some
large universities and research institutes did not reply to the survey, which
diminishes the representativeness of the results of the research performance
organisations.
For
the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it
should be noted that part of the funding of private industry research takes
place directly by ministries without intervention by any funding organisation.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Brussels‐Capital Region strategy for Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) - up-date || 2012 || X ||   
 Flanders : Smart Specialisation strategy concept paper || 2013 || X || X 
 Indicators' database of BELSPO || 2012 || X ||   
 WAL-TECH || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Research strategy 2011-2015 of Wallonia and the Brussels-Wallonia federation || 2012 || X ||   
 Calls on international experts for the evaluation of fellowships and projects applications ||   ||   ||   
 Wallonia's Marshall Plan 2.Green || 2012 || X ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Peer Assessment of the Walloon regional innovation system (OECD) || 2012 || X ||   
 Fundamental Strategic Research Fund || 2012 || X ||   
 Belgian Research Action through Interdisciplinary Networks (BRAIN_be) || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Adoption of a joint action plan shared by the  governments of Flanders, Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation for boosting economic activity through R&D || 2012 || X ||   
 Joint call Belgium/India || 2011 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Joint call for micro awareness-raising projects in 2011 called ‘Later, I will be Einstein or Marie Curie' Regions Wallonia/ Brussels and French speaking community || 2011 ||   ||   
 Bilateral agreements for economic, industrial, scientific and technological cooperation with third countries ||   ||   ||   
 Joint call for RDI projects- WB GREEN (Brussels Region and Wallonia) || 2012 || X ||   
 Flanders: Interreg programme participation ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Financing of research infrastructure investments ||   ||   ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Euraxess Belgium ||   ||   ||   
 ‘Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers’ || 2012 || X ||   
 Opening up recruitment of researchers ||   ||   ||   
 Improve  objectivity and transparency of decision making on recruitment and researchers career paths, including equal opportunities ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Training young researchers and opening up career prospects || 2011 ||   ||   
 Brussels Capital region - DOCTRIS ||   ||   ||   
 Flanders – Baekeland mandates            innovation mandates ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Collaboration agreement  with the Flanders Scientific Research Fund (FSR) 2012-2016 || 2012 || X ||   
 Minimum % of experts of the same sex in scientific evaluation panels ||   ||   ||   
 Gender at Universities high-level action group || 2013 || X || X 
 Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for researchers || 2011 ||   ||   
 Flanders : Gender Action Plan || 2012 || X ||   
 Women and Science committee Wallonia-Brussels Federation ||   ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open Access scheme ||   ||   ||   
 Brussels Declaration on Open Access || 2012 || X ||   
 STIS service of BELSPO || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Wallonia - Second “Public Private Partnership” (PPP) call ||   ||   ||   
 Excellence centres - Flanders || 2012 || X ||   
 Public-Private Partnership (PPP 2012) Programme || 2012 || X ||   
 Support of interface technology transfer offices ||   ||   ||   
 "Innovation centre Flanders" - Concept Note || 2012 || X ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
Bulgarian Government has adopted a series of measures aimed at modernising the
national research and development (R&D) structures. The Bulgarian National
Reform Programme (NRP) 2013 identifies the need to improve the efficiency of
public spending for R&D by leveraging funds to attract more private capital
as key for achieving its national target of 1.5% of GDP in 2020. 
The
highest policy-making body of the Bulgarian research system is the National
Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria (Parliament) which decides the state
budget to be allocated for research in the country, as well as its
distribution. Its Standing Committee on Education, Science, Children, Youths
and Sports plays an important role. Since 2012 the Parliament has controlled
the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences research activities directly. 
Research
and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of
Education, Youth and Science (MEYS) and  the Ministry of Economy, and Energy
co-shares some responsibilities for designing and implementing the national
R&D policy. The main competitive national public R&D funding
instruments are the National Innovation Fund (NIF) and the National Science
Fund (NSF).
The
biggest research performers in Bulgaria are the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
(BAS), the Agricultural Academy and some of the Bulgarian universities. A
recent trend is for research to be carried out in smaller private sector
organisations. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food hosts the Agricultural
Academy, which champions Bulgarian research policy in agriculture. Similarly,
the Ministry of Health oversees the National Centre of Public Health
Protection. The core portion of Bulgarian scientists is employed in public
R&D organisations and higher education establishments, while the percentage
of scientists in business organisations is 14% of the total.
The
country has not adopted a coherent national research and innovation strategy to
underpin the research, development and innovation policy. The National Strategy
for Scientific Research to 2020, as of 2011, is the key policy document, which
sets five priority areas for the development of research in Bulgaria. Public
competitive R&D project grants, support for R&D infrastructures,
structural reform of public research institute sector are becoming important
characteristic of the national policy. However, some necessary strategic
documents and measures are still under preparation such as the Innovation
Strategy, announced already in 2011. 
The
latest R&I policy developments in the country are related to the published
drafts for the operational programme (OP), called “Science and Education for
Smart Growth 2014-2020” (version 02.06.2014) and „Innovation and
Competitiveness” (version 02.06.2014), both approved by the Council of Ministers.
In
terms of R&Dfunding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Bulgaria represented EUR 14 per inhabitant
in 2012, less than 10% of the EU28 average (EUR 179).  In 2012, total GBAORD
corresponded to 0.7% of total government expenditures and 0.2% of Gross
Domestic Product (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows s that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD
in Bulgaria has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In
terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Bulgaria, measured as
percentage of public government expenditure evolved negatively, but less
negatively than the evolution observed at EU 27 level. Finally, GBAORD as a
share of GDP has regressed more in Bulgaria than the regression observed in
EU28.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Since
2010, the competitive project-based R&I funding mechanisms are prevailing
the institutional ones. The inflow of EU Cohesion and Structural Funds in 2010
and 2011 has considerably increased the share of competitive public funding for
R&D. 
The
“Regulation No. 9” allows each Higher education institution (HEI) to dedicate
funds (up to 10%) of its total R&D budget to activities, related to their
current financing and support, allocated on competitive basis. Progress must be
reported to MEYS every six months.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 80 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding  is higher than the EU average.
The
National Evaluation and Accreditation Agency has introduced criteria compatible
with the European standards, as norms expressed about desired practices,
developed and applied for the institutional and programme accreditation,
evaluation of the projects for opening or transforming HEIs. The Agency defined
a system for post-accreditation monitoring and control and the basis for
contacts with similar institutions and associations in Europe. 
Funding
instruments should respect peer review principles, however submitting proposals
only in Bulgarian, in some cases, may in fact hamper the foreign review if
needed.  Starting from 2014 the project proposals submitted to the National
Science Fund should be submitted in Bulgarian and in English and the evaluation
panels should involve foreign reviewers.
Creating
national centres of excellence and competence should embrace capacity and
potential for innovation growth both of the research institutes and
universities working in partnership with the industry and international
partners. They will be supported only after an international evaluation of the
proofs of concept (deadline for submission 30 May 2014) and a valorisation of
their ten year Research and Innovation Strategic Agenda.
One
international evaluation and consultation of research organisation has been
undertaken so far by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS), performed jointly
by the European Science Foundation (ESF) and ALLEA. The evaluation had
significant impact on the reform, taking place in the BAS during the period
2010-2012 in the direction of programme oriented organisation of research
activities.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
The
institutional funding available for R&D in universities and in the
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences is further distributed to research projects on
the basis of competitive calls. The R&D funding available, according to
law, is 10% of the total state subsidy, available for each university (in spite
of some fluctuations in practice). Similar is the situation in BAS, where funds
are allocated by the General assembly, upon approval from the Board of
trustees. The allocation of the state subsidy among the 42 BAS institutes is
based on recent research performance and results of international evaluation.
However, institutional funding is seldomly allocated based on an institutional
assessment.
Sources
about research funding instruments in the Higher Education Sector are not that
many. The European University Association (2009) indicated that, in Bulgaria,
funding is distributed using line-item budgets, which implies that universities
receive their funding for already allocated cost items and/or activities
(European university funding and financial autonomy, DG Joint Research Centre,
2011).
In
2010 a new Law on development of academic staff has been introduced, regulating
the acquisition of scientific degrees and academic positions based on autonomy,
free choice of scientific development and objectivity in his assessment, public
interest and international recognition and exchange of information when
conducting procedures.
The
government announced its intention to put in place a system of regular
international evaluation of public research funding organisations (NSF) and
research performing organisation.
The
ranking of universities, launched in 2010, provides the government with a tool
for performance-based allocations. However, the share of funds allocated
according to this ranking is comparatively small and is could be better focused
on R&I. The ranking system compiles information and data for more than 70
indicators, which measure different aspects of university activities including
teaching and learning, university environment, welfare and administrative
services, science and research, prestige, career development and relevance to
the labour market.
The
draft strategy for developing higher education foresees a new methodology for
determining the differentiated standards for maintenance of educating a student
based on the real value of education and research performed in any professional
field. It also envisages measures for strengthening the research potential and
innovative developments in high school.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that the allocation
of institutional funding is not based on institutional assessment.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
According
to the ERAWATCH report Bulgaria needs to set more precise guidelines to
elaborate and implement effectively support measures in order to define and
implement common research agenda on grand challenges. The existing set of
priorities of the research agenda are not yet sufficiently connected to meeting
grand challenges.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
support transnational cooperation.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Bulgaria
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme, the share of participation of Bulgaria in total participation is
0.6% and the country received 0.3% of total EC contribution. FP funding
represents EUR 13 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period
2007-2013 and 0.1% of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the
period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3% of GERD for the same
period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in one of the 10
on-going initiatives, namely the Cultural Heritage and global change: a new
challenge for Europe. 
Bulgaria
has been involved in 25 joint calls.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two out of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 20 ERA-NETs, of which 8 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in one ERA-NET Plus
actions in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial
support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy has been developed by the Commission
in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova,
Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises
science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six
scientific clusters were launched.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
International
cooperation in the fields of education, higher education, science and
technology is based on bilateral and multilateral international agreements and
implementation of cooperative programmes. Bulgaria has bilateral scientific
agreements with eight third countries among which joint research programmes are
running with Ukraine, India, China and Switzerland.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU
ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes
No
relevant information was found about the degree of implementation of mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
as a basis for national funding decisions (peer review standards defined in ESF
peer review guide). A Formal comprehensive evaluation of Bulgaria’s
participation in the Framework Programmes of the EU is planned for 2014. 
Bulgaria cooperates with the META group in the project MIRRIS (Mobilising
Institutional Reforms in Research and Innovation Systems), which aims at
encouraging a better exploitation of European research and innovation
programmes and participation in the European Research Area of the 13 target
countries by setting up a process of analysis, dialogue, mutual learning among
key concerned stakeholders, namely research, innovation and institutional
actors.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Bulgaria allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is lower than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Bulgaria
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR)-Dubna and European Fusion
Development Agreement (EFDA).
The
country contributes 2,54% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the
European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory
(ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)
(Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures (RI)
included in the ESFRI Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory
phase of six of them (12%. of the RI in the Roadmap). 
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research
Infrastructures, Bulgaria is committed to fund one RI, namely: CLARIN-ERIC.
With
regards participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Bulgaria
is not yet involved in any of the nine consortia which adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of Research
Infrastructures, the national roadmap on research infrastructures was published
in 2010 and does include references to the participation of Bulgaria in the
development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap.
Seven of the projects had been supported at national level for preparatory
phase. Still, Bulgaria lacks financial, industrial and human potential for
construction and maintenance of big research infrastructures. Currently an
update of the roadmap is ongoing, following an international evaluation by
ESFRI experts. It will include national research centres with proven capacity
or creating new to serve as regional partner facilities (RPFs) or nodes/hubs of
distributed pan-European Research Infrastructures. RIs should be financed
jointly by national funds and under the OP” Science and Education for Smart
Growth” 2014-2020.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
While
the National Strategy of Scientific Research 2020 defines ambitious objectives
towards cross-border access to research infrastructures, its implementation is
still a challenge. 
For
the RI coordinated by Bulgaria, access has been funded by the European
Commission
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Bulgaria in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Bulgaria_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
There
were 11,902 FTE researchers in Bulgaria in 2011. This represents 3.6
researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 3.0 among the Innovation Union
reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 0.4 in Bulgaria
compared with 9.0 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7
In
2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
According
to the guidance on implementation of the Law on Development of Academic Staff,
all open research positions must be published in the Bulgarian Official Journal
and on the institutional web sites - though they are mainly published in
Bulgarian. The new law eliminates the age criterion formerly applied to
applicants for scientific positions, including post-doctorate positions,
provides defined evaluation criteria which become available to the candidates,
and it also provides feedback on the decisions taken by the scientific
commission. Job vacancies are also published on other platforms (e.g. the
labour agency) and the EURAXESS jobs portal, but these are not statutory
requirements.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
Representatives
of the Bulgarian Rectors Council have signed the ‘Charter & Code’ in 2007.
By May 2014, 2 Bulgarian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 1 had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.
The
“Law on the Development of Academic Staff” enables universities to define their
own staff policy. In addition, it provides a mechanism for regulating the
careers of scientific personnel. The implementation of the new Law will result
in a qualification and career development system for academic staff - planned
for the end of 2014.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.6 in
2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
Under
the Bulgarian Labour Code, all PhD students receive fixed grants (including
social security cover) for three years. Universities and research institutes
can apply for funding for their doctoral candidates from the state budget based
on open competition. In order to improve research funding opportunities, the National
Science Fund (NSF) offers doctoral candidates the possibility of participating
in competition-based science projects which can serve as an additional source
of income. Approximately 30% of the resources of the NSF are dedicated to young
researchers. In addition to new policies aimed at improving the research
profession in Bulgaria, bilateral programmes, such as the Sciex Programme with
Switzerland, are considered not only to be a means of improving researchers’
funding opportunities, but also as instruments for increasing the quality of
doctoral training in Bulgaria.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 3.1% in Bulgaria compared with 1.7% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 3.8% in Bulgaria
compared with 2.0% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 24.2%. 
There
are more outbound researchers than those wishing to pursue a career in
Bulgaria. The Sciex Programme with Switzerland and other bilateral research
programmes support researchers’ outbound mobility and foster knowledge
transfer. The Science + Business project supports young researchers in gaining
practical work experience in foreign research institutions. As part of this
initiative, young researchers receive short-term training abroad in foreign
research infrastructures.
The
Science + Business Project provides a platform for researchers to carry out
projects in collaboration with industry. Supported by universities, research
institutes and businesses, the scheme fosters skills and knowledge transfer
between the different parties. Research projects must address societal
challenges and provide solutions which are market-oriented.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Gender
equality is regulated at horizontal level. The transposition of the European
directive on gender equality (Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000)
provides for equal treatment of women and men in research. In Bulgaria more
women than men are involved in the research profession. It is difficult to
attract men into research careers due to the low salaries in the public
research sector.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
Labour Code grants women researchers the right to interrupt and extend their
contract during maternity leave. However, other contracts (stipends,
fellowships, or equivalent) do not guarantee the right to maternity leave. The
right depends on the contractual conditions and on the researcher's level of
income in the previous 18 months.
Bulgaria
supports the L’Oreal and UNESCO ‘For Women in Science programme’ and co-funds
the L’Oreal national fellowship programme.
In
2012 a Bulgarian Centre of Women in Technology (BCWT) was launched to promote
more girls and women in the technology sector. 
Bulgaria
is one of the few countries reporting higher success rates of female
researchers for grant applications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
There
are no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes,
however there are some stakeholder initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 22.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Objective
3 of the National Strategy for Promotion of Gender Equality for the period
2009-2015 clearly states the importance of the promotion of gender equality in
governance and decision-making bodies in the development of science.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 27.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Bulgaria is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the key strategy document is the National
Reform Programme 2012-2014 which points to the need to develop strategic
long-term infrastructures to support the building and maintaining of the
high-performing computing infrastructure, and access to different network
infrastructures like GRID networks, European digital data bases.
The
Bulgarian research community is informed about the benefits of open access and
uses open access research publications. There is a certain level of awareness
among libraries, though still very few institutions are involved in managing
repositories. At a special meeting of the Association of University Libraries
(AUL) in 2010, the steps to build open repositories were outlined. 
A
national concept and an action plan for open access are under development by a
working group to the Ministry of Education and Science.
The
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS) announced its intention to establish a
network of scientific open access centres. The Institute of Mathematics and
Informatics at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (IMI-BAS) will coordinate the
Bulgarian network and will provide support for academic institutions and
researchers. IMI-BAS will launch a national project to develop the research
infrastructure and digital repositories for researchers, educators, public
bodies and companies who need contemporary scientific and education information
and resources (Implementing Open Access Mandates in Europe, 2012).
Related
to open access to publications, different practices are applied in the country
and there is not enough information available to quantify the preferred types
of open access use. There is a specific programme of the NSF supporting open
access (OA) for covering OA-related costs. Different practices are applied in
the country but the preference in the institutions is for the Green model open
access use. The OA policy is envisaged to become mandatory for all public
research funding organisations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 15.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Research
funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting Open Access to data.
With
respect to repositories, as of August 2012, there were six Bulgarian open
access repositories registered in Open-door: those of the New Bulgarian
University, IMI-BAS (Bulgarian Digital Mathematics Library and Bulgarian
Openaire Repository), Burgas Free University, Sofia University “St. Kl.
Ohridski”, and Medical University of Sofia. Apart from them there is a
repository at Tsenov Academy of Economics and a pilot repository of the
University of Rouse.
There
are currently 32 Bulgarian open access journals available in the Directory of
Open Access Journals (DOAJ). In addition, a pilot repository of the University
of Rousse and the Medical University of Sofia (MU Sofia) is now being tested to
become the Electronic Repository of the Central Medical Library of MU Sofia.  
The
Bulgarian Current Research Information System (BulCRIS) is developed and
maintained by MEYS. (BulCRIS) is a starting point for detailed information
about Bulgaria’s research, development and innovation resources, and for
staying in touch with the latest innovations. BulCRIS is targeted to bring
together the abilities of universities and institutes in Bulgaria, and of
organisations throughout the world to help them make efficient use of these
resources.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, the National Strategy of Scientific Research provides measures
aiming to promote KT between public and private sectors. The draft of the new
Law on innovation also suggests such measures. Even though there is not an
explicit national strategy to promote knowledge transfer, measures exist to
foster KT at stakeholder level. More than 40 Knowledge transfer offices are
supported by special funding.
The
2014 NRP announces the development of a national bulletin for monitoring the
condition of the links between business and science.
Strategic
partnership between academia and industry are supported by funding
organisations in Bulgaria. As an important step in that direction is the
establishment of the first science and technology park in Sofia, co-financed by
the ERDF for around EUR 50 million, which should grow into a core national
R&I hub and attract leading local and international scientists. 
Within
the OP “Human Resources and development” Science and business project an
integrated platform was developed and launched in April 2013. It provides a
meeting point between science and business for the purpose of developing
partnerships and joint work on projects (NRP 2014).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support
national support to KT and OI, Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) and Private
Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of Digital ERA a national policy has been
initiated by the research community. As a result, since 2008, MEYS provides  national
access for 58 research institutions, public and private universities,
hospital’s research centers to scientific information, including bibliometric
resources and analytical tools. 
Additionally,
the Bulgarian Information Consortium was set-up, an organization of  38 members
representing academic, public research organisations and libraries aimed at
sharing good practice and resource development.
Concerning
digital services, the Commission could not identify support to their provision.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 53.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 32.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Bulgaria
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. 
From
2009 to 2012 the institute of Technology and Development Foundation
participated in a FP7 Project OpenScout aiming at providing an education
service via internet to enable users to easily find, access, use and exchange
open content for management of education and training.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 41 research performing organisations in Bulgaria answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 31.7% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations
in Bulgaria shows that 39.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 51.2
% can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 9.8 % of
organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when
the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each
organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’
organisations are 59.6 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 37.7 % for the ‘ERA
limited compliant’ cluster and 2.8 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Finally,
it should be noted that the major research funding organisations in Bulgaria
did not respond to the ERA survey which may have an incidence on the analysis
of the state of implementation of ERA by research funders.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation (draft) || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Operational Programme "Science and Eductaion for Smart Growth" || 2014 || X || X 
 Draft regulation for monitoring and evaluation of scientific research activities || 2011 ||   ||   
 Joint ESF and ALLEA International evaluation “Research at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences” || 2009 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Operational Programme "Competitiveness" || 2007 ||   ||   
 National Strategy for Scientific Research 2020 || 2011 ||   ||   
 National Innovation Fund - competitive grants 2012 || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on Higher Education || 1995 ||   ||   
 Law on Scientific Research Promotion || 2003 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National research infrastructure roadmap, on-going update || 2010 ||   ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 EURAXESS BULGARIA portal ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Ordonance in accordance with  European Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third country nationals for the purposes of scientific research || 2008 ||   ||   
 Operational programme “Human resource development”(OP HRD) ||   ||   ||   
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 Support to doctoral training || 2012 || X ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Harmonisation of strategic documents according to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 || 2000 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Support to Open Access || 2014 || X || X 
 Open access infrastructure for research in Europe (OPEN AIRE) || 2010 ||   ||   
 National digital library || 2006 ||   ||   
 The world’s largest bibliographic database, providing the foundation of cooperative library services in metadata management, discovery, resource sharing and collection management (OCLC WorldCat® || 2008 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 "Science-Business" project || 2011 ||   ||   
 Draft Law on Innovations || 2013 || X || X 
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) system in Cyprus is
relatively new and is evolving with the aim to increase efficiency and
modernise the Government, research and productive sector cooperation. At the
operational level of the Directorate General of European Programmes,
Coordination and Development (DGEPCD), an independent government agency, is
entrusted with the formulation of the research and innovation strategy
(R&I), the identification of objectives and the introduction of policy
measures aimed at the promotion of research activities in Cyprus. At the
implementation level, most of the R&I activities are integrated under the
Research Promotion Foundation (RPF), an autonomous agency governed by a
12-member board, chaired by the current Permanent Secretary of DGEPCD under the
supervision of the DGEPCD. The Foundation is fully supported by the Government
and its resources are derived mostly from the Ministry of Finance through the
DGEPCD. The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism (MCIT) is responsible
for industrial policy, including the promotion of technology and
entrepreneurship. 
The
System for Research, Technological Development and Innovation is governed by
the National Research and Innovation Council (NRIC), made up of competent
ministers, chaired by the President of the Republic and advised by the Cyprus
Scientific Council (CSC). The latter is composed of internationally-recognised
scientists.
The
main research performer group are the public research institutes and
universities. Private Universities followed by private sector organisations and
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). 
Recently,
a systematic effort was initiatated in order, (a) to evaluate the current
research and innovation system and procedures in Cyprus and to give
recommendations for its adjustment and upgrade so it becomes more effective and
efficient and (b) to adopt explicit multi-annual RTDI priorities.
The
National Committee for Research, Innovation and Technological Development
(NCRITD) was established by the Council of Ministers, in September 2013. This
Committee was entrusted with the task of evaluating the current R&I systems
and procedures in Cyprus and give recommendations for its adjustment and
upgrading so it becomes more effective and efficient.  The work of the NCRITD
was completed in March 2014 and its outcomes submitted to the President. The
report of the NCRITD proposes creating a new system structured in four levels
(strategic, political, operational/implementation and research stakeholders),
which integrates Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The study proposes
among others, to appoint a Commissioner for Research Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, create a new Directorate General for Research, Innovation and
Entrepreneurship under the Ministry of Finance,  establish an Advisory
Committee and redesign the role of the Research Promotion Foundation (RPF) in order
to accommodate Technology Transfer activities. The study is currently being
reviewed by the Presidency.
The
joint effort of the RPF and a research team of the Cyprus Technology University
is to propose a smart specialisation strategy based on desk research,
experience and a field survey (800 companies) and discussed with a Steering
Committee composed of national stakeholders. It is expected that the Government
will receive all input by the end of June 2014 and adopt priorities by the
Summer.
Additionally,
the preparation of the Smart Specialisation Strategy for Cyprus, an ex-ante
conditionality for the absorption of European Structural and Investment Funds
for R&I, was initiated in mid-2013 by DGEPCD and is expected to be
finalised in September 2014. An extensive analysis of the national R&I
priorities has been conducted with the aim of maximising the knowledge-based
development potential of the Cyprus economy through targeted support to R&I
in the sectors where Cyprus has a competitive advantage. The sectors identified
through this process are tourism, energy, construction, shipping, health,
information and communication technology (ICT) and environment.  The overall
results of the Smart Specialisation Strategy in line with the recommendations
of the NCRITD, will be used to determine the vision and the formulation of a
new Strategy for Research and Innovation. This Strategy will be implemented
through the programmes of the Research Promotion Foundation which is the main
funding agency for research and innovation in Cyprus.
In
order to encourage cooperation between academia and industry, a project under
the name 'Development and operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices in
Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus', involving a consortium of
six Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus, was awarded in 2009. Six
Industry Liaison Offices, three public and three private Universities, are in
full development and operation at the moment. 
The
Government of Cyprus is investigating the possibility for creating a Science
Technology Park (STP) in the form of a Knowledge Park with the scope of
promoting research, innovation and technology. In the short term, the main
objective of the STP will be to enhance the entrepreneurial and industrial
development of Cyprus. Even more in the long term the objective will focus on
transforming  Cyprus into a regional research and innovation center. 
Finally,
it should me mentioned that due to the prevailing economic crisis in the
country and the consequent liquidity constraints, the main source of public
funding for the implementation, the new R&I Strategy is expected to derive
from the European Structrual and Investment Funds (ESIF) for the period 2014-20
in Cyprus. The bulk of the funding that will be allocated for R&I from the
ESIF operational programme (OP) for Cyprus will be spent through the DESMI
2014-2020, which is the National Framework Programme for R&I designed and
implemented by the Research Promotion Foundation. In parallel, the Technology
Service of Ministry of Energy, Commerce Industry and Tourism will implement
schemes for specifically promoting business innovation.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Cyprus represented EUR 81 per inhabitant
in 2012, less than half the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD
corresponded to 0.9 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 % of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat).
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
major sources for project-based funding of R&D activities are the
programmes launched by the Research Promotion Foundation (RPF). Grants are
distributed through the multiannual competition-based National Framework
Programme (NFP) for Research and Technological Development (DESMI). Currently,
funding comes from the 2008-2010 programme. A new multiannual programme is
under preparation based on the results of the Smart Specialisation Strategy for
R&I. This Strategy will be implemented through the programmes of the RPF
which is the main funding agency for R&I in Cyprus. As mentioned before,
the sectors identified from this Strategy, which are tourism, energy,
construction, shipping, health, ICT and environment, will be thematic areas
where the multiannual programme will focus.  
Once
the priorities are formally adopted by the Government, the RPF will launch new
calls in autumn 2014 at the earliest. Competitive funding addresses both basic
and applied research in the context of DESMI.
Project-based
funding is composed of the calls of the RPF and most recently the innovation
call of the Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism. Although no
precise data are published on an annual basis, the delays in new calls by the
RPF since 2011 result in a de facto increase of the share of institutional
funding.
Historically
institutional funding was block-funding. Only State aid for Research and
Innovation took the form of competitive funding. Since the adoption of DESMI,
additional competitive funding was used for individual research teams and
collaborative projects. DESMI 2009-2010 was running until recently with five
priority axes. Multidisciplinary development of Research, Development of Human
Resources for Research, Development of Research and Innovation for Enterprises,
Development of Research Infrastructures, Development of International
Networking and Collaborations. A total of 1 126 proposals were submitted for
funding by DESMI 2009-2010. However, due to financial constraints and provisional
governance problems in the RPF, competitive funding has diminished since 2011.
RPF announced that the budget of all research proposals would decrease by 35
%.  
The
only new competitive call launched in 2012 was the 'Enhancement of Business
Innovation in Cyprus', launched by the Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry
and Tourism. A total of 41 proposals were approved for funding, with a total
budget of EUR6.2 million, 62.9 % out of which will come from public funding.
New similar calls were announced for the new programming period 2014-2020. As
2013 was marked by the financial crisis and the end of the programming period
no funds were released for new calls.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are based on selection panels
composed of Greek researchers. When DESMI competitive calls are launched the
selection of projects relies on international peer review. This process was
designed independently of the European Research Area (ERA) requirements, as the
national research community is too small and local peer review only could
jeopardise objectivity.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
The
government plans institutional funding annually through the state budget.
Institutional assessment is partly allocated based on institutional assessment.

Public
higher education institutes (HEIs), which benefit from block-funding, have
introduced internal research support mechanisms: faculty members apply for a
(small) research budget and selection is based on a review process by an
internal HEI Committee. Based on a study on the degree of diversification of
university budgets and the share of competitive funding, 86 % of the university
budget of the University of Cyprus comes from core funding, 2 % comes from
competitive funding and 12 % comes from EU funds.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Cyprus allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Cyprus
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third
Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Cyprus in total participation is
0.4 % and the country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding
represents EUR90 per inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period
2007-2013 and 19.5 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for
the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same
period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in five of the 10
on-going initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Food
Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change:
a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, Water Challenges for
a Changing World, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes, as leader in none of
them. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four
existing initiatives: EUROSTARS, Ambient Assisted Living.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 20 ERA-NETs, of which nine are
currently still running. T
Concerning
research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Cyprus has four
bilateral agreements with France, Slovenia, Romania and United Kingdom.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy, although bilateral reseach
agreements exist with Egypt, Israel, Cuba and the United States.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with Third Countries.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, no budget of organisations' research and
development originating from Third Countries could be identified .
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
There
is no mutual recognition of evaluations, national funding decisions still
follow a rule of path-dependence rather than following evaluations.
There
are no other common ex post evaluation procedures except those foreseen and
implemented in the context of the European Commission.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed
decisions made by non-national institutions.
Research
funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Cyprus
participates in the large international research infrastructure (Ris) of the
European Space Agency (ESA). In 2012, the country contributed 0.3 % of GBAORD
to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern
Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the
Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research
Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of RIs included in the European
Strategy Forum on Reserach Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates
in the preparatory phase of five of them: European Social Survey, PRACE,
DARIAH, KM3NeT, EU SOLARIS. Researchers from Cyprus have also expressed
interest in participating and/or are participating in the following projects:
European XFEL, CLARIN, BBMRI, ELIXIR and the European Spallation Source. The
participation of Cyprus in the above projects does not include the coordination
of any of them.
In
terms of financial commitments to developing these research infrastructures,
Cyprus is not involved.
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Cyprus is not involved.
In
May 2013, RPF invited interested parties to express their interest in
participating in the ESFRI Roadmap. A total of 40 proposals were submitted by
July 2013.  The strategy in investing in pan-European R&Is including those
from the ESFRI roadmap will be part of the National Strategy for the period
2014-2020. Additionally in June 2013, RPF announced  the launch of an excercise
for mapping the Cyprus Research landscape. As part of this procedure the RPF,
in cooperation with the Cyprus Science Council, initiated the examination of
the current situation in order to facilitate the formulation of a national
roadmap for R&Is. The study uses 22 R&D indices and two structured
questionnaires addressed to research institutions and researchers.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Cyprus in the
Researchers Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Cyprus_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 915 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Cyprus in 2011. This
represents 2.1 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Innovations Followers) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 66.5 in Cyprus
compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 54 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Recruitment
for research positions in Cyprus is considered open and transparent. All
publicly-funded vacancies are published on the Cyprus Government Gazette
official website, on local press websites and on the Cyprus EURAXESS portal.
Job vacancies are often published in English.
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 65.5 in the Republic
of Cyprus compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 43.7. 
All
publicly-funded research jobs must be advertised online on the EURAXESS jobs
portal. In addition, the social security services of the Republic of Cyprus
have created a portal for employers and employees on social security
legislation and the implementation of Council Regulation 1408/71 on 'the
application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed
persons and to members of their families moving within the Community'.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
RPF serves as the Bridgehead Organisation and Service Centre for the EURAXESS
Network in Cyprus. The RPF is responsible for promoting the implementation of
the Charter & Code through its networking activities with the research
institutes and the dissemination of promotional material. 
By
May 2014, six Cyprian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which two had received the 'HR Excellence
in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
The
Government of the Republic of Cyprus has adopted a package of measures aimed at
training enough researchers to meet its R&D targets and at promoting
attractive employment conditions in public research institutions,   training
enough researchers to reach Cyprus’ R&D targets, promoting attractive
working conditions, and addressing gender and dual career aspects. 
However,
in the past, the severe economic crisis and the fiscal austerity measures
adopted led to a considerable reduction in the budget for R&I, which
hampered the adoption and implementation of any new strategy.
On
the positive side, the new Government as of March 2013 has announced that a
significant effort will be put into R&I as an attempt to exit the financial
crisis. As a result of this, a National Committee on Research, Innovation and
Technological Development (NCRITD) was set up by the Council of Ministers in
September 2013, consisting of distinguished experienced scientists coming from
the Cypriot academic, research and business sectors, to review the national
R&I system and to give relevant recommendations on its governance to the
President of the Republic of Cyprus. The work of the NCRITD was completed in
March 2014 and its outcomes submitted to the President. The report of the
NCRITD proposes to create a new system structured in four levels (strategic,
political, operational/implementation and research stakeholders), which
integrates Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The study proposes among
others, to appoint a Commissioner for Research Innovation and Entrepreneurship,
create of a new Directorate General for Research, Innovation and
Entrepreneurship under the Ministry of Finance, establish an Advisory Committee
and redesign the role of the RPF in order to accommodate Technology Transfer
activities. The study is currently being reviewed by the Presidency. 
Further
to that the Smart Specialisation Strategy for R&I, an ex-ante
conditionality for the utilisation of European Structural and Investment Funds
(ESIF) for R&I in Cyprus, is expected to be finalised in Spring 2014. The
sectors identified through this process are tourism, energy, construction,
shipping, health, ICT and environment.  
The
outcomes of the two abovementioned reports are expected to prove as useful
input to draw up the National 2014-20 R&I Strategy that is expected to be
completed by the end of 2014. This Strategy will be implemented, mainly through
the programmes of the Research Promotion Foundation, which is the main funding
agency for R&I in Cyprus. In parallel, the Technology Service of Ministry
of Energy, Commerce Industry and Tourism will implement schemes for
specifically promoting business innovation.
Finally,
due to the prevailing economic crisis in the country and the consequent
liquidity constraints, the main source of public funding implementing the new
R&I Strategy is expected to derive from the ESIF for the 2014-20 period in
Cyprus.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
0.3 in 2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
The
on-going scheme for the promotion of innovation in training and development of
human resources (HRDA)  aims to encourage enterprises and organisations to
prepare and implement proposals that include the research and development of
innovative ideas for training and developing of human resources. This scheme is
open amongst others to entities such as universities, research institutes and
major industries, which deal with R&I in human resources issues.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 9 % in Cyprus compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. 
The
percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral
candidates was 1.7% in Cyprus compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 24.2%. 
The
Government of the Republic of Cyprus has not implemented measures encouraging
researchers to spend time as a researcher in another country. However,
universities permit their academic staff to take ‘sabbatical leave’ on request
for the purpose of expanding their research interests/aspirations, but such
provision is not provided for non-academic research staff. Researchers also
have the right to participate in research projects/conferences in accordance
with the research programme provisions funding opportunities. Language barriers
and the cost of accommodation remain the major mobility obstacles for incoming
researchers. In addition, the low demand for researchers and PhD holders from
local industry impedes inward mobility. However, the fully operational EURAXESS
Service Centre in Cyprus, along with the adoption and implementation of the
Scientific Visa Package, are two factors that are increasing the number of researchers
from abroad coming to Cyprus. The Proselkysh Programme is targeted to young and
experienced researchers not residing in Cyprus but wishing to carry out
research within a Cypriot host research organisation. 
A
University-Industry Liaison Offices Network was established in 2010 at the
major Universities in Cyprus. The network is composed of six Liaison Offices,
with full human resources in place, and a shared web portal and data base
hosting registered profiles e.g. academic, laboratory, business and student
profiles. The main priorities of the network are to ensure benefits to business
and industry through academic research results and vice versa, to maximisee
opportunities and employment potential of students/graduates through a student
placement framework, to promote cross-national agreements/partnerships with
Universities in Europe (similar activities) through student placements and
internships, to exploit University research results by Cypriot businesses and
encourage research in the Cyprus business Society.  
The
operation of the network proved extremely successful, in particular with
regards to student placements that reached 937, exceeding by far the initial
target of 400 placements.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Gender
equality is not a specific topic in the research agenda in Cyprus. 
In
2013, there was a decision to join the Gender NET ERA-NET.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 26.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
In
Cyprus, as far as eligibility of fellows to participate in the national
research programmes for post-doctorates is concerned, in cases where the
potential fellow was on a maternity leave, or has served his military service
after he/she has obtained his/her PhD title, then the requirement of obtaining
his/her doctorate in the past five years could be extended (for maternity leave
one year per child could be added, for military service the actual time of
service) as this is certified by the competent authorities.
Funding
agencies consider leaves of absences in researcher evaluations and project
monitoring. 
As
far as eligibility of fellows to participate in the national research
programmes for post-doctorates is concerned, in cases where the potential
fellow was on a maternity leave, or has served his military service after
he/she has obtained his/her PhD title, then the requirement of obtaining
his/her doctorate in the past five years could be extended (for the maternity
leave one year per child could be added, for the military service the actual
time of service) as this is certified by the competent authorities.
 There
are no initiatives to strengthen the gender dimension in research programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
There
are no explicit quotas or quantitative targets. Scientific evaluators are urged
to consider the projects positive contribution to gender equality (where
applicable) and research funders consider equality and women’s representation
in the evaluation process of research projects and project monitoring.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 33.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations could
not be identified. However, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees
for leading researchers is high in the limited compliance cluster.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, there is no specific document or initiative
describing the national policy concerning open data policies in Cyprus. A
limited number of local data collections were identified and contacts with the
responsible persons are in progress by the Cyprus NOAD (UCY Library). 
However
within the framework of OpenAIRE & OpenAIREplus projects, the UCY Library
supports institutions that hold data sets in various forms and either by
digitising or hosting their data in open formats (e.g. project of the
digitisation of the Complete Gazetteer of Cyprus, produced by the Land Survey
Department of Republic of Cyprus).
Open
access dissemination activities are implemented through the Project OpenAIRE
and OpenAIREplus, which is represented by the University of Cyprus Library
since 2009. 
There
are three parallel approaches for dissemination purposes: 
I.          Central
approach: Contacts with the Research Promotion Foundation (which is also one of
the NPR for open access) in order to forward informative material via email for
Open Access and OpenAIREplus.
II.        Cluster
approach:  a) Participation in conferences of librarians/information scientists
who acted as multipliers because they were able to disseminate the obligation
derived by SC39 FP7 projects to their institutional researchers.  b) We
indentified and participated with posters or papers in conferences /
information days that took place in our region through which we reached
researchers.
III.       Individual
approach: Emails were sent to the Cypriot coordinators/partners of SC39 FP7
projects and phone calls were answered for questions and help requests.
Related
to open access to publications, in November 2008 the Senate of the University
of Cyprus supported and accepted the Library Committee’s proposal to sign the
Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities.
(http://oa.mpg.de/lang/en-uk/berlin-prozess/signatoren/). The Berlin
declaration was also signed in 2011 by the Governing board of the Cyprus
University of Technology.
In
October 2009 the Cyprus Academic Library Consortium (CALC) signed a nationwide
subscription contract with BMC (Biomed Central) for an open access model to the
BMC journals.
Furthermore,
a cooperation network was established including different stakeholders in order
to increase awareness on open access (OA). One of the results of this
networking was the launch of the "Cyprus University of Technology Open
Access Author Fund". 
It
is noted that in the last few years Academic Institutions organise relevant events
in Cyprus during the European Open Access Week.
Concerning
funding allocations on the 21 October 2013 an agreement between the Cyprus
University of Technology Library and the Pharmaceutical company REMEDICA was
signed so, Academic publications could be funded with open access terms and be
deposited in an open institutional repository.
It
should be noted that there are no publishers in Cyprus dealing with academic
publications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 45.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, 2 repositories provide access to research data of the HEI 
(Cyprus University of Technology and East Mediterranean University).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting open access to data.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
Currently
there are three Open Access Institutional Repositories in which researchers can
submit relevant articles in Cyprus:
•           
The repository LEKYTHOS, University of Cyprus
•
          The repository KTISIS, Cyprus University of Technology
•
          The repository KYPSELI, Open University Cyprus
The
University of Cyprus Library works as a partner in OpenAIRE & OpenAIREplus
- under the Institutional Repository LEKYTHOS and it allows the imporation and
diffusion of publications and primary research data while acting as a point of
information, which supports researchers in depositing articles and in diffusing
their research.
Also
Zenodo which is also a European repository (orphan repository) that enables
researchers, scientists, EU projects and institutions to easily access, share
and reuse research results in a wide variety of formats including text,
spreadsheets, audio, video, and images across all fields of science, is also
promoted in Cyprus as an alternative hosting area.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Cyprus has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. Funding
organisations have not specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation
of knowledge transfer.
Strategic
partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are being developed in Cyprus.
Specifically
in order to encourage cooperation between academia and industry, a project
under the name 'Development and operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices in
Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus', involving a consortium of
six Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus, was awarded in 2009. The
project will last six years and is funded by the European Union Social Funds.
Its purpose is to strengthen the links and the relationships between
Universities and the Industrial environment, in order to develop operations and
communication tools for supporting cooperation and placements of students in
industry. Six Industry Liaison Offices, three public and three private
Universities, are in full development and operation at the moment. It is the
first time that a wide channel of communication and common data base among the
Universities has been established and furthermore between the academic
community and the business world, in order to achieve a wider promotion of
knowledge transfer, student internships, and entrepreneurship.
So
far, the Industry Liaison Offices (ILOs),  have achieved the following results.
They managed to arrange for the placement of approximately 1 500 students in
organisations, of which 924 were arranged directly from the ILOs, whereas in
the remaining the ILOs provided indirect support. Furthermore, 803 academics
and researchers have had their profiles recorded, along with 194 research
laboratories. Finally, the ILOs have recorded the profiles of 615
organisations. So far,these results have enhanced the culture of developing
co-operation between the academia and the business world.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector could not be
identified.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of the Digital ERA, Cyprus has set up a
strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and
education network, essential to make digital services possible.
In
2012, a Digital Strategy was adopted, aiming to provide a comprehensive plan
for the period 2012-2020 and introduce a holistic approach for developing
information society in Cyprus. The Strategy focuses on six strategic
objectives, (i) Connect Cyprus, (ii) Modernise public administration and
provide public electronic services, (iii) Inclusion of all into digital Cyprus,
(iv) Education and learning, (v) Digital entrepreneurship, (vi) ICT for the
environment.
CyNet
is Cyprus' National Research and Education Network. It provides a network
infrastructure for the Cypriot Research and Education Community. CyNet connects
educational and research institutions. The national backbone of CyNet is
connected to the European backbone GEANT2, which is a part of the worldwide
community of research and education networks. Through this connection the CyNet
backbone is also connected to the Global Internet as well.
Furthermore,
due to the manageable size of the country, the UCY Library was able to reach
all existing three institutional repositories (Cyprus University of Technology,
Open University of Cyprus and University of Cyprus) to meet the guidelines of
OPENAIRE compliance. 
Drawing
from the experience gained through the active participation of the University
of Cyprus (UCY) Library in OPENAIRE programs, the Library has undertaken a
project to identify, collect and organise all the scientific research output of
the University in an open access repository (it should be noted that the UCY
research output constitutes 62 % of the country’s total output). This will
reinforce and facilitate the ability of UCY Library NOAD to influence the rest
of the research institutions and policy makers, ministries and funders towards
establishing a regional open access agenda.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Cyprus
is not a member of eduGAIN.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the limited ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 13 research performing organisations in Cyprus answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 75.8% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Cyprus shows that 18.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 45.5 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 36.4 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 8.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 90.2 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.8 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Smart Specialisation Strategy for Research and Innovation (under preparation) ||   ||   ||   
 Cyprus Innovation Strategy (under development) || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Reform of the National Research and Innnovation System ||   ||   ||   
 Enhancement of Business Innovation in Cyprus || 2012 || X ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Innovation Strategy (under review) || 2013 || X || X 
 DESMI Programme ||   ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Joint Research Agendas ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Participation in Joint European Programmes || 2014 || X || X 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Roadmap - under preparation ||   ||   ||   
 Call for participation in ESFRI roadmap || 2014 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Euraxess Cyprus ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Programme for the Support of Young Researchers || 2000 ||   ||   
 HR Logo award - Action Plan of the Cyprus Institute of Neurology and Genetics & University of Cyprus for Charter and Code || 2010 ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 Participation in COST Programme:"Gender, Society, Technology and Environment” Initiative || 2012 || X ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Law 100/1997 for the protection of mothers (as amended) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open access repositories || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Development and Operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices at the Universities Operating in the Republic of Cyprus || 2011 ||   ||   
 “Manufuture-CY” || 2012 || X ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Digital Strategy || 2012 || X ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
In
2008, the Czech Republic launched a comprehensive reform of the research and
innovation (R&I) system (Act No. 211/2009 Coll, amending Act No.130/2002
Coll.).         
As
a result, the Council for Research, Development and Innovation (CRDI) was put
in place as an advisory body of the Government, thereby improving the
governance and coordination of the system. As a single advisory body for
innovation policy (in a broad sense) and for the coordination of public support
to research, development and innovation (RDI), the CRDI defines applied
research priorities (through different committees), proposes the research,
development and innovation State budget and is ultimately responsible for the
annual evaluation of research institutions. It also targets funding towards
potentially strong and globally competitive research fields and areas with
strong potential for applications. The recently-established Government now
includes a Vice-Prime Minister in charge of science, research and innovation,
who will be chairing the CRDI. While CRDI has become the main coordinating body
of the RDI system, the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) and the
Ministry of Industry and Trade (MIT) continue to set priorities in the context
of the National Innovation Strategy and to administer the European Structural
and Investment Funds (ESIF) through their respective operational programmes
(OP) dealing with research and development (R&D) and innovation. The MEYS
is particularly concerned with public sector R&D, particularly
institutional funding for public universities. It is also responsible for
international R&D cooperation as well as the support to large R&D
infrastructures and fulfilling the administrative function of a central
administration body for R&D, e.g. maintaining registers of public research
institutes. The MIT is responsible for policies in the domain of business
R&D and innovation. 
The
reform also reorganised R&D funding bodies by creating the Technology
Agency of the Czech Republic (TACR), which directly reports to CRDI and is in
charge, together with the already existing Grant Agency of the Czech Republic
(GACR), of managing most of the targeted R&D competitive funding provided
by MIT.
In
2013, the Government updated the 2009-2015 National Research, Development and
Innovation Policy of the Czech Republic with a view towards 2020, approved the
implementation plan of the National priorities for oriented research,
experimental development and innovation (2012-2030) (including the revised six
priorities for oriented R&D) and set the goal of preparing the Smart
Specialisation Strategy and the Strategy of Internationalisation of Higher
Education, research and development and innovation (R&D&I) and
Business. All these R&D&I policy documents currently fall under the
overarching International Competitiveness Strategy steered by the Office of the
Government.
The
National Research, Development and Innovation Policy defined long-term national
priorities for R&D&I: (1) Quality and productive research system; (2)
Effective knowledge transfer; (3) Innovative businesses; and (4) Stable,
efficient and strategically-governed research and innovation system. One of its
main goals with respect to increasing efficiency of the national R&D&I
system is the preparation of a new methodology for R&D&I results evaluation
and research organisations institutional funding.
The
2014 National Reform Programme mentions that the Government is going to define
a governmental body responsible for innovation by revising the legislation.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Czech Republic represented EUR 99 per
inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant declined
a little (EUR 97). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5% of total
government expenditures and 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).
During
the period from 2007 to 2012, several changes in public R&D expenditures
were observed. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in the
Czech Republic was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms
of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in the Czech Republic,
measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively.
In comparison, in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD, measured as a
percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally,
GBAORD as a share of GDP evolved positively in the Czech Republic even when it
regressed at EU-28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
bulk of competitive project-based funding is administered by GACR, which
allocates grants for basic research, and by TACR, which allocates grants for
applied research and development. GACR also awards postdoctoral grants with
limited funding on an open, merit and competitive basis. GACR has a budget of
CZK 3.3 billion (EUR 132 million) in 2013. On the side of applied research and
development, there is currently a transition period where TACR is taking over
the management of most of MIT's competitive funding. The budget of TACR has
grown significantly in recent years from CZK 0.9 billion (EUR 34 million) in
2011, to CZK 2.8 billlion (EUR 113 milllion) in 2013 to CZK 2.6 billion in
2013. In addition, five other ministries administer their own (relatively
small) competitive research funds in their respective domains (agriculture,
health, defence, interior, and culture). The coordination between all research
programmes (funded from the national budget) is ensured by CDRI. 
In
the 2014 National Reform Programme, the Czech Government mentions that it will
start preparing a new methodology for evaluating programmes that targeted
support of research, development and innovation, including ex ante, interim and
ex post stages, which should be finalised by the end of 2014.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 53.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
In
order to guarantee the scientific excellence of funded projects, both GACR and
TACR use peer review in the framework of their calls of proposals and
international reviewers for their evaluation.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Since
the 2008 reform, there has been a constant decrease in institutional funding
from 56 % in 2009 to 51 % in 2012. In its outlook for 2014, the CRDI envisages
a further decrease to 47 % in 2014 and 2015.
In
principle any research organisation, irrespectively of its public/private status,
is entitled to receive institutional support from the state R&D budget on
the basis of the excellence of the R&D results, which the organisation
achieved in a specified time frame.    
The
largest recipients of institutional funding are on the one hand institutes of
the Academy of Science of the Czech Republic (ASCR) and on the other, other
public research institutes and higher education institutions (HEIs)
(particularly via the MEYS which distributes the funds). Due to its particular
status, ASCR uses its own internal evaluation methodology for internally
redistributing the funds that have been received.
Over
the period 2010-2013 the performance of research institutions was
systematically evaluated annually, strictly based on quantitative indicators.
The results were used by the CRDI as a starting point for allocating funding.
However, the Government decided to revise the evaluation methodology, following
a Country Specific Recommendation from 2012 and criticism by stakeholders and
by the independent international audit of the Czech R&D&I system
(Arnold, E. 2011).    
The
National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 reaffirms that a revised methodology is
expected to be available for 2016, while the Country Specific Recommendation
2014 calls for accelerating the development of a methodology that would
increase the share of performance-based funding of research institutions. This
new methodology is expected to take into account the status and role of
beneficiaries, be based on international peer review and place emphasis on
excellence in the international context and cooperation with industry. The 2014
NRP also mentions the methodology for the transitional period 2013-2015, which
has been prepared based on a combination of new evaluation criteria (such as
peer review of books and, for applied research, funds attracted from businesses
and acquired through competitive funding) and peer review. The evaluation of
research uses a five-year rolling average. The results of the first evaluation
using this revised methodology are expected in time to be used for the 2015
R&D budget while the CRDI has the authority to recommend that the
Government increases budget lines of particular providers. Still, the
transitional methodology referred to above is seen as a short-term solution and
a more comprehensive methodology as foreseen by the National Reform Programme
2014 is needed. This complex solution should include right incentives to public
researchers to strive for excellence, address societal challenges and cooperate
with the business sector.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 45.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is higher
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
As
part of the revision of the 2009-2015 National R&D&I policy performed
in 2013, the set of national priorities for R&D&I was revised to better
target the six major grand challenges identified (competitive knowledge
economy, sustainable energy and material resources, environment for quality
life, social and cultural challenges, healthy people and secure societies).
Those priorities are largely in line with the grand challenges of the Horizon
2020 proposal. International cooperation is encouraged and emphasised in
particularly in these areas.        
MEYS
is responsible for the international R&D cooperation. International
cooperation activities are supported through separate budgetary lines (worth
approximately CZK 2 billion). The Interdepartmental Policy of International
Cooperation in R&D (2008-2015) should help address international
cooperation together with other ministries through cross-sectional R&D
programmes, improve the participation of Czech researchers in international
research programmes, increase effectiveness of R&D cooperation based on
bilateral intergovernmental agreements and unify the administration of present
programmes of international cooperation in R&D.      
The
2014 NRP states that the Government will develop a Strategy of
Internationalisation of Higher Education, R&D&I and Business by the end
of the year. This strategy, which will include, among others, a long-term
strategy for membership of the Czech Republic in international research
organisations, supports the participation of the Czech entities in Horizon
2020, the principles of involving the Czech Republic in international
R&D&I initiatives and programmes implemented within the ERA and the
objectives for developing international cooperation in R&D&I with
countries outside the EU.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Czech Republic allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in CZ dedicated to
jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the
EU average.
The
cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries
and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh
Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation from the Czech Republic
in total participation is 1.2 % and the country received 0.7 % of total EC contribution.
FP funding represents EUR 23 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for
the period 2007-2013 and 2.1 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (latest available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD
for the same period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in five of the
ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage
and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life
and Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health.           
There
are programmes at national level which support research on topics relevant to
the Strategic Research Agendas (SRAs). Funding of common actions and alignment
of national programmes to the SRAs are under development.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes: EUROSTARS and EMRP.
In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 28 ERA-NETs, four of which are
currently still running. The country also has participated in one ERA-NET Plus
action in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial
support topping up their joint call for proposals.
The
Czech Republic has concluded about 70 inter-governmental bilateral R&D
cooperation agreements, but only some of them are implemented in the way of
joint R&D projects funding: with the United States, Russia, China, South
Korea, Japan, Argentina, France, Austria, Germany, Israel, Poland and Norway
(The Norwegian Financial Mechanism) in the frame of which it recognises
evaluations made by partner countries.      
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the
Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,
Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It
comprises of science and technology cooperations across the region and by the
end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched, for example a cluster in
energy and sustainability research.            
The
Visegrad fund (between the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and the Slovak
Republic) also provides research grants from a common pot contribution of all
countries involved.     
The
2014 NRP states that the Czech Republic is going to put in place a National
Space Agency, being the space R&D coordination body, and update the
National Space Plan, which focuses its attention particularly, but not
exclusively, on cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA).
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries, the Czech Republic has
many  inter-governmental bilateral agreements, including with the United States
of America, Russia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Argentina and
Chile. Regular funding is attributed through the GACR bilateral grants (based
on agreements with the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, National Science Foundation
of Korea and National Science Council of Taiwan) and TACR budget (newly
launched DELTA programme). However, the majority of funds for bilateral
cooperation are provided through the MEYS via the KONTAKT II programme, which
focuses on the implementation of non-EU intergovernmental agreements.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Czech Republic
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of organisations'
R&D budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards
is supported in the frame of the bilateral agreements under a mechanism close
to the 'lead agency' procedure. However the Money-follows cooperation or
Money-follows researchers scheme are not supported by funders.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 57.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer
reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
the Czech Republic allocated through peer review carried out by institutions
outside the country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
Czech Republic participates in the following large international research
organisations, particularly: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour
la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), The Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR),
European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Southern Observatory
(ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), Fermi National
Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and Pierre
Auger Observatory. In 2012, the country contributed 0.8 % of GBAORD to the
activities carried out by CERN, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s
Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat). In early 2014, the Czech Republic
became a MS of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL).
In
terms of participation in the development of Research Infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of nine of them (18 %).
With
regards to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
the Czech Republic is involved in six of the nine projects. The country is a
member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, EATRIS ERIC, ESS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and
CERIC-ERIC, and committed to fund all six. Moreover, all six large European
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) funded centres (ELI, IT4I, BIOCEV, CEITEC,
SUSEN and FNUSA-ICRC) participate in ESFRI projects.
A
proposed draft amendment (March 2013) of the principal law governing research
and development (Act No.130/2002 Coll.) should provide institutional funding to
support of international cooperation in research on the basis of international
evaluation (in order to conform to the Council Regulation 2009/723/EC from 25
June 2009 on ERIC).
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures
(Ris), the Czech Republic includes RIs among the policy priorities. The Roadmap
of Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures in the Czech
Republic was approved in 2010 and it was updated in 2011. Another update is
planned for 2014/2015 on the basis of the new methodology for Large Research,
Development and Innovation Infrastructures evaluation, which will be prepared
by mid-2014. The roadmap includes references to the participation of the Czech
Republic in the development of the RIs mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. There is
a multiannual budget for funding Large Research, Development and Innovation
Infrastructures in the Czech Republic with annual appropriations of
approximately CZK 800 million (i.e. EUR 30 million).
In
order to ensure the long-term sustainability of the 'European Centres of
Excellence' (six R&D centres being built in 2007–2015 using ERDF with the
investment costs over EUR 50 million each), the first National Sustainability
Programme II call is going to be launched in 2014. Up to 60 % of operating
costs of the 'European Centres of Excellence' are to be covered by public
funds, while at least 30 % of operational costs shall be covered by
international (foreign) or private funds. The total expenditures of the National
Sustainability Programme II (2016–2020) are expected at the level of EUR 500
million, including EUR 250 million of contribution from the public funds of the
Czech Republic.
With
the intention of guaranteeing long-term sustainability of 42 regional R&D centres
and 32 R&D centres in Prague (being built by using ERDF in 2007–2015 with
investment costs up to EUR 50 million each), the National Sustainability
Programme I continues to be implemented. The total expenditures spent in the
programme (2013–2020) will reach EUR 700 million, including EUR 350 million of
contribution from the Czech Republic public funds.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by the Czech Republic, the access to
two of them was funded by the European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for the Czech Republic in
the Researchers Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Czech
Republic_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 30 682 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the Czech Republic in
2011. This represents 5.9 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 5.3
among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU
average of 6.7.
 
 4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 22.8 in the Czech
Republic compared to 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 43.7.
In
2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
In
the Czech Republic, each institution is an autonomous employer with its own
personnel and recruitment policies. There is no statutory instrument that would
allow breaches of the autonomy of the institution. There is no legislation
dealing with the online publication of publicly-funded research jobs. EURAXESS
Czech Republic operates the Czech National EURAXESS Jobs portal that is linked
to the pan-European EURAXESS Jobs portal. This tool is used increasingly by
Czech public research organisations/institutes and universities.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
In
2009, the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (ASCR) declared its
interest in the 'Human Resources Strategy for Researchers incorporating the
Charter and the Code' and included some of the principles to their career
system The ASCR also joined the Charles University’s Charter & Code
Promoter´s Network’ project (2010) that focuses on raising awareness of the
Charter & Code in the research community. As of 2012, the ASCR and the
Central European Institute of Technology (CEITEC) were the only research
organisations that had signed the Charter and Code in 2006 and 2012
respectively. The Charter & Code are actively promoted by the coordinator
of the EURAXESS Network in the Czech Republic at different events organised for
researchers as well as for research organisations
By
May 2014, one Czech organisation was actively engaged in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers.
There
is no policy at Government level in the Czech Republic to offer clear career
prospects to researchers. However, an increasing number of institutions,
especially natural science institutes of the ASCR, require graduated doctoral
students to leave the institution for a postdoctoral fellowship elsewhere.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per 1 000 population aged between 25 and 34
was 1.5 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group
and an EU average of 1.7.
Attracting
young talented students to become researchers has been embedded in the
International Competitiveness Strategy, the National Innovation Strategy and
the Human Resources Development in R&D documents developed by the
Government of the Czech Republic. All three documents suggest the development
of tools and strategies to inspire young people to become researchers. In 2013,
there were 24,755 doctoral students at higher education institutes (HEIs) in
the Czech Republic, compared to 24 803 in 2012 and 16 491 in 2001. Active
doctoral studies in sciences (including mathematics, technology and
engineering) accounted for 49.8 % of all doctoral studies in 2013. If medical,
pharmaceutical, and life sciences are included the proportion rises to 65.2 %.
The percentages have remained relatively stable for the past five years.
The
Czech Government has not put in place any measures to increase the number of
students taking science to a doctoral level. Moreover, national statistical
data and recent reports from the Institute for Information on Education (ÚIV)
and the Research, Development and Innovation Council state that - one third of
doctoral graduates in the Czech Republic go into a science and technology
career. The Czech Government, along with grammar schools, universities and research
institutions, is working towards creating or supporting (existing) tools to
attract students to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
subjects. In addition, several universities as well as the National Contact
Centre for Women and Science at the Institute of Sociology of the ASCR have
introduced mentoring programmes to attract women students at secondary
education level to follow STEM subjects at university level.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 9 % in the Czech Republic compared to 4.2 % among the
Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 4.7%. The percentage of
non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 4.1%
in the Czech Republic compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference
group and an EU average of 24.2 %.
The
Návrat (Return) programme (2012-2019), funded by the Ministry of Education,
Youth and Sports targets researcher reintegration. It creates conditions for a
faster and more successful reintegration of professionals with significant
experience in research organisations within the Czech Republic. Since 2012,
five-year reintegration grants have been provided. The first call was
regionally limited and focused on the region of the capital city because of the
complementarity with some particular calls under the operational programmes.
Since 2013, three-year reintegration grants have started without any regional
limitation. The shorter period was set due to better flexibility,
complementarity with other measures and the existed limitations of the R&D
national budget.
Another
measure is the Purkyne Fellowship, which is awarded by the ASCR and aims to
attract ‘leading’ researchers from abroad (mostly Czechs who have spent a
period abroad). In the Czech Republic, the level of awareness of the scientific
visa for scientists/researchers from third countries has improved thanks to the
EURAXESS Network in the Czech Republic. Most researchers from third countries
are now well informed about the scientific visa via the EURAXESS centres
located at universities and other research organisations in the Czech Republic.
The Czech embassies are also well aware of the scientific visa procedures, and
thus more and more scientists are being advised to apply for this type of
permit.
The
Czech Government (the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech
Republic) along with universities, research institutions and industrial partners
are working towards creating support for existing tools to boost the
collaboration between academia and industry. For instance, the Czech Government
is currently implementing an ‘Effective Knowledge Transfer’ project. This is
one of several individual national projects under the Education for
Competitiveness Operational Programme. The project covers systems for
intellectual property protection and commercial use, commercialisation of
R&D results, and cooperation with industry. The project also involves the
development of support methodologies for the implementation, the creation of
networks for effective knowledge transfer, and the training of the target group
of users in methodological materials. The issue of encouraging researchers to
move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa has been embedded in
the Czech National Innovation Strategy and is being implemented by the Ministry
of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic. Despite recent efforts to
develop new collaborative programmes, cooperation between academia and industry
is still underdeveloped in the Czech Republic.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
recruitment, retention and career progression of researchers is regulated by
the general labour market legislation on non-discrimination and equal
opportunities (the Act No. 262/2006, Coll. on labour code, the Act No. 435/2004
Coll. on employment and the Act No. 198/2009, Coll. on antidiscrimination).
Labour law guarantees a maternity leave of six months with return to the same
position (not for fixed-term contracts) and parental leave up to three years.
The Government proceedings (or law) require that gender impact is assessed for
every Government resolution.
The
Governmental Resolution No. 1033 of 2001 establishes measures on equal
opportunities. The most important body concerning equal opportunities is the
Governmental Council for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, which started
its activity at the end of 2002 as an advisory body of the Government. Also
created in 2001, the National Contact Centre for Women and Science ('Zeny a
veda') is the main agent shaping gender policy in R&D in the Czech
Republic. It carries out analysis and raises awareness about gender issues.
A
strategy on gender equality in public research, in line with the ERA
Communications objectives, is being prepared by the Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs. No dedicated funds shall directly be allocated to the
implementation of this strategy in the field of research and innovation; MEYS
only consults Zeny a veda every year on priority actions to be carried out.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 57.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
Czech Republic has set up some awards, fellowships and/or other similar
mechanisms to specifically support female researchers. The award Milada Paulová
is jointly organised by MEYS and Zeny a veda for lifelong achievement of female
researchers in Czech science. The L’ORÉAL Scholarship Czech Republic for Women
in Science is also in place.
At
the funders’ level, the GACR allows, with some restrictions, female researchers
to interrupt or postpone research activities due to maternity leave. In 2013,
an independent audit was carried out to assess gender equality in the operation
of GACR, but the results have not publicly been released yet.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 22.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for
female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
So
far, it seems that no provisions exist to tackle the gender dimension in
research programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 35 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
The
Czech Republic has not set up any targets for the participation of women in
decision-making bodies of Research Performing Organisations. However, the ASCR
has constantly increased the share of women in higher management positions.
Thus, the representation of women in its Academic Council is now about 25 %.
The ASCR has established the National Contact Centre for Gender & Science
of which it is also supportive.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 19.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of gender-balanced
recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing
organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in CZ is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the CRDI administers the R&D&I
information system of the Czech Republic, which provides open access to
information about publicly-funded research activities, projects and their
outputs. It allows the collection, processing, publication and utilisation of
data. The Czech Statistical Office (CZSO), pursuant to the Section 17
'Provision of confidential statistical data' of the Act No. 89/1995, on the
State Statistical Service, provides confidential statistical data for
scientific research purposes. Several open access repositories are run by
different stakeholders.
Related
to open access to publications or data, there are no specific obligatory
measures in place at national level. However, in February 2014, the CRDI
approved its document titled 'Open Access to published research results
financed by public budget'  (CRDI OA Document) which mainly presents three
types of recommendations:
1°)
Recommendation for respective public administration bodies to tackle open
access issue and prepare national strategy on open access,
2°)
Recommendation for research organisations to deal with open access at
institutional level in terms of supporting repositories and adopting internal
guidelines on open access,
3°)
Recommendation for R&D&I grants providers to include requirement to
promote open access to scientific publications into their R&D&I
programs. The stakeholders targeted by the CRDI OA Document are expected to
start acting in line with the recommendations as soon as possible unless they
have already done so. For example, a number of Czech universities as well as
the ASCR have an open access policy in place and have their institutional
repositories for depositing research publications. The Association of Libraries
of Czech Universities also provides institutional support to open access.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of publicly-funded
scientific publications in open access amongst research performing
organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, there seems to be limited support.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 13.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support open access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations making available online and free of charge
publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than that
within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, a few research organisations have created their own
repositories.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private
sectors, the Czech Republic’s National Innovation Strategy (NIS), published in
October 2011 and coproduced by MIT and MEYS, lists 'Cooperation and knowledge
transfer between academia and industry' as one of the four priority areas.
Additionally, the National Research, Development and Innovation Policy also promotes
better research links between academia and industry. The newly implemented
R&D programmes, mostly funded by TACR but also by MEYS and MIT, support
public-private R&D co-operation (ALFA, Centres of Competence, etc.) With
the same overall objective, two new governmental programmes have recently been
put in place: EPSILON, supporting applied research and experimental development
for industry and GAMA to support a more efficient transfer and commercial
exploitation of R&D&I results. The state-of-the-art intellectual
property rights (IPR) legislation is in place and the NRP 2014 mentions that
the Government will support its application. These efforts are being largely
supported by EU funds allocated to R&D, which reached 0.3 % of GDP in 2012
and have become one of the main sources of R&D funding in the Czech
Republic. As a result, the level of public funding injected into the national
innovation system is currently quite high by EU standards (in 2012, the sum of
national and EU funding of R&D amounted to 1.01 % of GDP) and business
expenditure on R&D is gradually catching up. However, these initiatives and
efforts are not yet translating into a visible improvement of the quality and
relevance of scientific output which would support the emergence and development
of more domestic innovation leaders. This weak performance is attributed to
misaligned incentives embodied in the current approach to evaluating public
research and allocating funding. The complexity of Czech research and
innovation policy may also play a role.
In
December 2012, the Government already approved an action plan to promote
growth, entrepreneurship and employment, which one of the proposed measures is
to extend the existing R&D tax credits to purchase external R&D
services from research organisations.     This is a step towards fostering
cooperation between academia and the business sector. Research performing
organisations are also assessed on their ability to attract industry funding
(see section on Effectiveness). Beginning with 2012, the setting-up of
Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) at universities or intermediary
organisations is supported via the Structural Funds. Strategic partnerships
between academia and industry are supported by TACR via the Centres of
Competence programme. Additionally, provisions are in place to support
public-private partnerships (PPPs) via Structural Funds.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 40.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 30.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and
support national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and
Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer
activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer
activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time
equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of the Digital ERA, in March 2013, the Czech
Republic approved the State Policy in Electronic Communications Digital Czech
Republic v. 2.0 - The Way to the Digital Economy. In 2010, with the approval of
CESNET (initially established in 1996 as a joint venture of universities and
the ASCR) the Czech Republic has implemented a research and education network
(NREN) essential to make digital services possible. CESNET is also the coordinator
of the National Grid Infrastructure (NGI) and a member of EGI.eu.    
Other
e-infrastructures of relevance are: eIGeR – e-Infrastructure and Grids for
e-Regions; IT4Innovations – building a national High Performance Computing
Centre of Excellence in the field of information and communication
technologies, NTIS (New Technologies for Information Society) and the CERIT
Scientific Cloud.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and
premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 31.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud
services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the
EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
The
Czech Republic was a member of an identity federation in 2011 via CESNET
providing inter-organisational identity management and interconnectivity of
networks. Also via CESNET, the country is a member of eduGAIN, a service
intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity,
authentication and authorisation between the GEANT (GN3plus) partners
federations. Among the projects run by CESNET, the EDUROAM infrastructure and
eduroam.cz project support and spread Internet Protocol (IP) mobility and
roaming in order to enable users of interconnected networks an easy and
transparent usage of any network connected to the roaming space. The Czech
Academic Identity Federation eduID.cz project provides means for
inter-organisational identity management and access control to network
services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 37.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research
performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their
researchers is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 24 research performing organisations in Czech Republic answered the
2014 ERA survey, which represents 8.0% of the total number of researchers in
the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Czech Republic shows that 34.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA
compliant’ cluster, 39.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’
cluster and 26.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’
cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of
researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the
shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 46.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster,
43.8 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 9.3 % for those
organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National Research, Development and Innovation Policy of the Czech Republic 2009-2015 with a view to 2020. National priorities of oriented research, experimental development and innovations || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Act No. 211/2009 Coll, amending Act No.130/2002 Coll. on the support for research and development from public funds || 2009 ||   ||   
 Council for Research, Development and Innovation (CRDI) || 2009 ||   ||   
 TCAR programmes for applied research and development ALFA, BETA, GAMA, DELTA, OMEGA programmes, Competence Centres || 2013 || X || X 
 Other programmes providing competitive funding TIP programme || 2008 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 New methodology to allocate institutional funding || 2013 || X || X 
 GACR Postdoc grants || 1998 ||   ||   
 Revision of the formula for allocation of institutional funding for 2013-2015 || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Participation in EIROs ||   ||   ||   
 Joint Programming Initiatives, ERA-NETS and ERA-NETS plus || 2009 ||   ||   
 Participation in Joint Technology Initiatives || 2007 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 GACR and TACR programmes ||   ||   ||   
 The Visegrad Fund || 2000 ||   ||   
 International bilateral agreements || 2006 ||   ||   
 National Information Centre for European Research (NICER) Czech Liaison Office for Research and Development in Brussels (CZELO) || 2005 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Update of the Roadmap for Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures || 2011 ||   ||   
 Draft version of the Amendment of the Act No. 130/2002 Coll. On the support for research and development from public funds || 2013 || X || X 
 Large Research Infrastructures linked with ESFRI || 2010 ||   ||   
 National Sustainability Programmes I and II || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Project „EURAXESS Czech Republic 2012 - 2015“ || 2012 || X ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Scientific Visa Package - transposed through Act No. 379/2007 ||   ||   ||   
 The Higher Education Act (Act No. 111/1998 Coll.) || 1998 ||   ||   
 Reform of Tertiary Education programme || 2013 || X || X 
 The Common Rules for Human Resources Management of CEITEC Code of Ethics for Researchers of the ASCR || 2011 ||   ||   
 International and inter-sectoral mobility 
 MOBILITY programme ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Act No. 262/2006, Coll. on labour code Act No. 435/2004 Coll. On employment Act No. 198/2009, Coll. On antidiscrimination General provisions in the NRP 2013 ||   ||   ||   
 Milada Paulova Award || 2009 ||   ||   
 Governmental Resolution No. 1033 of 2001 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Government proceedings ("Jednací řád vlády") || 1998 ||   ||   
 ERA Working Group on Human Resources Development and Equal Approach to Women and Men in Research, Development and Innovation. || 2001 ||   ||   
 Ministerial gender focal points Working Groups for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men || 2001 ||   ||   
 National Contact Centre for Women and Science || 2001 ||   ||   
 L’ORÉAL Scholarship Czech Republic for Women in Science || 2007 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Research Data Repositories ||   ||   ||   
 Open access repositories ||   ||   ||   
 Central Register of R&D projects Register of public R&D tenders Information Register of R&D results Central Register of Institutional Research Plans || 1993 ||   ||   
 www.openaccess.cz www.dspace.cz || 2010 ||   ||   
 Statistical Data for Scientific Research Purposes ||   ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Priority Axis 3 “Commercialisation and popularisation of R&D“ of the OP Research and Development for Innovation || 2006 ||   ||   
 Action plan to promote growth, entrepreneurship and employment || 2013 || X || X 
 National Innovation Strategy of the Czech Republic || 2011 ||   ||   
 ALFA Programme Centres of competence DELTA programme EF-TRANS TIP programme || 2009 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Czech Education and Scientific NETwork (CESNET) || 2010 ||   ||   
 IT4Innovations || 2010 ||   ||   
 CERIT Scientific Cloud || 2010 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Czech academic identity federation (eduID.cz) - member of eduGAIN || 2009 ||   ||   
 Project eduroam.cz || 2004 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
In
Germany, the central responsibility for research, technology and innovation
policy lies with two ministries: the Federal Ministry of Education and Research
(BMBF) is mainly responsible for public research, while the Federal Ministry
for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) focuses on funding innovation and
research in the business sector. In addition, other Federal Ministries provide
funding for research in their respective spheres of competence, particularly
the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL), the Federal Ministry of
Health (BMG), the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure
(BMVI) and the Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building
and Nuclear Safety (BMUB).          
The
16 Länder also provide funding for research and innovation (R&I) under
their own programmes. Regional research and innovation policy is to some extent
based on the Federal Government's research funding priorities but also follows
regional funding agendas. The Länder are responsible for higher education
legislation and for financing institutions of higher education.         
The
Joint Science Conference (GWK) is the main body that coordinates research
policies between the Federal Government and Länder (State) governments.          
The
German Science Council (sometimes called the German Council of Science and
Humanities - WR) advises the Federal Government and the Länder on questions
related to universities, science and research both content-wise and from the
structural development point of view.         
The
German Research Foundation (DFG), the German Rectors' Conference (HRK), the
Helmholtz Association (HGF), Fraunhofer (FhG), the Max Planck Society (MPG),
the Leibniz Association (WGL), the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH), the
German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), the German National Acedemy of
Sciences (Leopoldina) and the German Council of Science and Humanities (WR)
have organised themselves in the Alliance of Science Organisations in Germany.         
The
Federal Government and the Länder jointly support the DFG as well as other
non-university research institutions: HGF, MPG, FhG,WGL the National Academy of
Science and Engineering (acatech), and Leopoldina. Other non-university
research institutions comprise of the departmental research institutions of the
Federal Government and the Länder, which also receive their basic funding
largely from the public sector.            
DAAD,
which is mainly financed by the Federal Government, supports international
exchanges of students, graduates and researchers. Public and private
foundations also provide funding for research, for example the Volkswagen
Foundation, AvH, the German Environment Foundation (DBU), the German Foundation
for Peace Research (DSF), and the twelve organisations for the promotion of
young talent in higher education.       
The
institutions of higher education comprise of government-funded and private
universities, universities of applied sciences and other academic institutions,
which all combine both academic teaching and research.
The
High-Tech Strategy 2020 of the Federal Government defines the central goals of
Germany's research and innovation policy. It is a follow-up of the previous
High-Tech Strategy of 2006 and was developed to concentrate the public research
and development (R&D) resources and improve coordination between all
affected ministries. The aim is to create lead markets in Germany, to intensify
cooperation between science and industry, and to further improve the framework
conditions for innovation. The overall goal of the High-Tech Strategy 2020 is
to make Germany a pioneering force in solving global challenges. In this
respect, the strategy addresses five key priority areas (demand fields) of
research that are linked to global challenges: climate and energy,  health and
nutrition, mobility, security and communication.  
In
its National Reform Programme 2014, Germany states that the High-Tech Strategy
as the Innovation Strategy for Germany will be further developed by the Summer
of 2014. It should reinforce the focus on challenges such as sustainable
development and digitalisation.
Additionally,
the Strategy of the Federal Government on the European Research Area (ERA), as
already anounced by the 2014 National Reform Programme, has been published at
July 18th. It focuses on researchers’ mobility, joint programming, research
infrastructures, knowledge transfer, gender equality and international
cooperation.
Germany
has a Country Specific Recommendation: 'Use the available scope for increased
and more efficient public investment in infrastructure, education and
research'.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Germany represented EUR 294 per inhabitant
in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant increased, to reach
EUR 306. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 2 % of total government
expenditures and 0.9 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Germany has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of
R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Germany, measured as a
percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison,
in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD measured as a percentage of public
government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP
has evolved positively in Germany even when it regressed at EU-28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
R&D
programmes by ministries (e.g. 'Initiative of Excellence', R&D thematic
programmes by BMBF; etc) are administered and managed by a range of implementation
agencies (Projektträger, seven at the moment), which are mostly located in
large research centres. These programmes provide project funding on a
competitive basis, according to the 'Pakt für Forschung und Innovation'.          
Most
R&D programmes support cooperation between public (or private) research
institutions, higher education institutions (HEI) and companies.
The
central task of the DFG is to award funding for basic research to universities
as well as research organisations' cooperating with them in projects via a
competitive procedure. DFG provides one of the main sources of competitive
funding through its funding programmes collaborative research centres, research
centres, research training groups, priority programmes and research units, both
in quantitative as well as in qualitative terms.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 56.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
Competitive,
peer review-based allocation of funds is the main procedure applied at DFG and
is embedded in its statute. International peer-review principles like
excellence, objectivity, transparency, confidentiality and ethics of science
are applied. In 2012, 26 % of DFG expert opinions were prepared by experts from
abroad. R&D programmes not managed by the DFG normally also require the
establishment of an evaluation committee.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
The
Federal Government and the Länder concluded a Pact for Research and Innovation
(also called the Joint Initiative for Research and Innovation) with the science
and research organisations (DFG, FhG, HGF, WGL and MPG) in 2005. The Pact was
renewed in 2009 to cover the period up to 2015. One of the objectives of this
joint initiative is to launch suitable measures to ensure and optimise the
quality, efficiency and performance of science and research institutions that
receive institutional funding. Large non-university research institutions (HGF,
FhG, MPG and WGL) allocate a share of their institutional funds on competitive
basis, based on processes that include peer review. According to the Pact for
Research and Innovation, these instruments should be developed further on a
continuous basis.         
90
% of the funding for universities is provided by public sources, 80 % by the
Länder and 10 % by the Federal Government. 10 % are private funds. The
governments of the Länder are responsible for financing research and teaching
at public universities in their respective state. Co-funding of universities by
the Federal Government is restricted to financing the construction of research
infrastructure and some specific programmes (for example 'Excellence
Initiative', Higher Education Pact, Programme for Women Professors).            
Institutional
funding to individual HEIs is partly allocated on a competitive basis. Within
HEIs, a certain share of salaries might be allocated on a competitive basis
with criteria defined and thus variable by State (Land) and university.
Evaluations
of public research institutions are carried out on a more or less regular
basis, for example by the WR. Depending on the outcome and recommendations made
in light of such evaluations, budgets provided by the Federal Government or the
Länder might be adjusted structurally (share of institutional to total
funding), in terms of total budget provisions (volume change, contribution of
Federal/State Government), up to the closure or reorganisation of the
corresponding institutes.           
The
evaluation of the German science system has also become increasingly
international since 2008. International science is represented on the permanent
advisory boards of the institutes of research organisations as well as on the
commissions for institutional and programme evaluation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 42.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is higher than
the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
The
2008 Strategy of the Federal Government for the Internationalisation of Science
and Research 'Strengthening Germany’s role in the Global Knowledge Society' has
four designated priority fields that form the central theme of the
international activities of German science and research: strengthen cooperation
with the world’s best, developing innovation potential at an international
level, strengthening the cooperation with developing countries in education and
research in the long term, assuming international responsibility and coping with
global challenges. Its objectives are well interwoven with the High-Tech
Strategy, the Pact for Research and Innovation and the Initiative for
Excellence. The strategy sets a general target of 20 % of the participation
rate of foreign partners for BMBF programmes, but the degree of openness is
programme specific.
The
general importance of international cooperation, especially with regards to
solving the 'grand challenges' has been highlighted and reinforced in the
High-Tech Strategy 2020, which is intended to help Germany assume a leading
role in the solution of global challenges.        
The
(revised) Pact for Research and Innovation calls upon research organisations to
continuously review and develop their internationalisation strategies in terms
of their contribution to increasing institutional performance. The
organisations establish and expand research collaborations on important topics
with excellent international partners and strategic countries, gain access to
research objects including those abroad and open up their own research
infrastructures to foreign researchers, become involved in global knowledge
flows and play an active part in shaping the ERA. Science organisations
described major aspects of these activities in their 2011 Pact Monitoring
Report and presented a joint position paper on internationalisation.         
The
major players enabling international research collaboration, which provide by
far largest share of respective resources, are the BMBF and the DFG. The
framework for international research collaboration is set by the BMBF’s 2008
'Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the preparation and
implementation of transnational calls for proposals' (Leitfaden des BMBF zur
transnationalen Zusammenarbeit).
The
National Reform Programme 2014 highlights cooperation within Joint Programming
Initiatives and International Cooperation as two of the fields to be included
in the forthcoming National ERA Strategy.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Germany allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Germany
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of participation of Germany in total participation is 15.4 %
and the country received 18.7 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents
EUR 82.7 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013
and 2 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period
2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in nine of the
ten ongoing initiatives, coordinating two of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better
Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world
and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (MS) (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 126 ERA-NETs, of which 37 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in 15 ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which ten are still running, in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Germany
has at least 23 bilateral agreements [notably with Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria,
Switzerland, Czech Repubic, Denmark, Greece, Spain, Finland, France, Hungary,
Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Moldova, The Netherlands, Poland, Romania,
Sweden, Slovakia, Turkey, United Kingdom] and three multilateral
agreements[notably with Austria and Switzerland under D-A-C-H, France, The
Netherlands, United Kingdom plus the United States beginning with 2013 under
Open Research Area (ORA) plus, the Open Initiative of ERA-Chemistry with 12
countries participating] either at BMBF or DGF level in order to launch and/or
further intensify cooperation in research and education, thus removing barriers
and/or explicitly permitting joint financing of projects and programmes. 
A
good example for BMBF cooperation with MS is the French-German Agenda 2020: the
bilateral work programme (adopted in 2010) lists more than 80 joint projects in
various political spheres, including in education, research and innovation.
Some specific research fields (for example energy and social sciences) have
been identified for further collaboration.  Furthermore BMBF and the respective
French Ministry organise French-German-Research-Fora every three years aimed at
opening up new fields of bilateral cooperation. 
DFG
has a broad range of international funding programmes such as the
German-Israeli Project Cooperation or the ORA plus for the Social Sciences).    
One
example in a range of initiatives carried out by the German Länder is the Upper
Rhine Tri-national Metropolitan Region (German Länder of Baden-Württemberg and
Rhineland-Palatinate and the French Alsace region) science programme set up in
2011 to facilitate the implementation of flagship projects in the Upper Rhine
area through INTERREG applications in the research and innovation sector.
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the
Commission in cooperation with 14 countries in the Danube region (Austria,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,
Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). Germany
promotes the cooperation between the countries in the Danube Region by
discussing the potential of multilateral research development and innovation
(RDI) funding. It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region
and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched, for example a
cluster in energy and sustainability research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, the
country has developed a specific policy. The political basis are usually
bilateral science and technology (S&T) agreements. The BMBF is managing
about 40 of these bilateral S&T agreements. In addition, a number of research
organisations implemented specific agreements with partner institutions on a
thematic level.  Their purpose is to launch and/or further intensify
cooperation in science and technology, thus removing barriers for and/or
explicitly permitting joint financing of projects and programmes. The
priorities for international cooperation are laid down in the strategy of the
Federal Government for the internationalisation of research and science,
published in 2008. The current government plans to further develop this strategy,
leading to a revised strategy to be published in 2015. The G8 Research Councils
Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding medium-term was established under
the initiative of the DFG in 2010. The goal is to establish a large pool of
multilateral projects that can be supported by the national programmes of the
German Research Foundation (DFG) and its partner organisations at any time.
The
international dimension is an inherent part of the national R&I system and
plays an important role in the realisation of the ERA. It encompasses all
activities the European institutions and MS jointly conduct on the
international floor and with Third Countries. The coalition agreement of the
federal election 2013 stated that the German Government will take responsibility
for the completion of the ERA and consequently implement its ERA strategy on a
national and European level. This also implies for the Federal Government to
enhance its S&T cooperation with Third Countries as integral part of its
national ERA strategy. In order to actively shape and strengthen the
international dimension, Germany uses the whole European governance structure
on a national and European level and takes its role seriously. 
One
activity stemming from the Competitiveness Council Conclusions of May 2013
invites the MS via the Scientific Forum for International Cooperation (SFIC) to
support the European Commission in developing the multi-annual roadmaps, which
define common European goals for future international S&T cooperation.
Germany followed this request in 2013 and for the coming years supports the
SFIC recommendations to develop a structured process for the consultation and
implementation of these roadmaps.  
Germany
is very actively involved in SFIC and is the lead MS for the United States and
the Russia pilot initiatives as well as a member of all working groups. Germany
is also an active participant in different Senior Official configurations,
aimed at implementing joint bi-regional activities, i.e. EU-CELAC, INDIA GSO,
EU-ASEAN, EU-WBC, EU-AU, EU-EaP, EU-MoCo.    
The
international dimension is an inherent part of the national R&I-system and
plays an important role in the realization of the ERA. It encompasses all
activities the European institutions and Member States jointly conduct on the
international floor and with third countries. In the coalition agreement of the
federal election 2013 it is stated that the German government will take
responsibility for the completion of the ERA and consequently implement its
ERA-strategy on national and European level. This also implies for the federal
government to enhance its S&T cooperation with third countries as integral
part of its national ERA-strategy. In order to actively shape and strengthen
the international dimension, Germany uses the whole European governance
structure on national and European level and takes its role seriously: 
One
activity stemming from the Competitiveness Council Conclusions of May 2013
invites the Member States via the Scientific Forum for International
Cooperation (SFIC) to support the European Commission in developing the multi
annual roadmaps, which define common European goals for future international
S&T cooperation Germany followed this request 2013 and for the coming years
supports the SFIC-recommendation to develop a structured process for
consultation and implementation of these roadmaps.  
Germany
is very actively involved in SFIC and is the lead Member State for the USA and
the Russia pilot initiatives as well as member of all working groups. Germany
is also an active participant in different Senior Official configurations,
aiming at implementing joint bi-regional activities, i.e. EU-CELAC, INDIA GSO,
EU-ASEAN, EU-WBC, EU-AU, EU-EaP, EU-MoCo.    
Germany
follows the approach to emphasize international cooperation within the Horizon
2020 governance structure via the horizontal configuration and the challenge 6
configuration of the programme committee. 
In
the field of international cooperation within FP7 Germany is one of the most
active EU-countries. German institutions successfully cooperate with 158
countries (out of 176) in FP7 projects.  In 2.078 projects third countries
participated (status February 2014). In 313 of these projects Germany acted as
coordinator and in this function received almost EUR 255 million from the
European Commission.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Germany
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is
higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from Third Countries is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is supported by the Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the
preparation and implementation of transnational calls for proposals. The
central goal of the guidelines is to provide the programme owners and
administrators with a basis for implementatiing transnational calls for
proposals within existing funding schemes, based on best practice and
experience gained in bilateral and joint ERA-Net calls. However, the selection
process as well as eligibility and assessment criteria have to be set in each
joint programme by the participating partners according to the program
specification.   
When
transnational project funding initiatives (e.g. ERA-NETs, Art. 185 measures)
include joint evaluation procedures, the scientific and technical results of
such evaluations are as a rule be recognised in Germany.
The
D-A-CH is a multilateral agreement between the German Research Foundation
(DFG), the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Swiss National Science
Foundation (SNSF). These agencies have agreed to apply the so called 'lead
agency' procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results
of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund
the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries
(for research projects with participants of at least two of the three
countries). It also allows researchers to move to one of those countries
following a money-follows-cooperation-line scheme, a scheme that allows small
parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be
conducted in a different country. DFG has no specific budget for projects that
are submitted and selected on the lead agency process. These projects compete
with purely national projects.          
DFG
applies the lead agency processes also in cooperation with Luxembourg. In the
G8 Research Councils Initiative on Multilateral Research and the ORA/ORA plus,
proposals go through a joint respectively coordinated evaluation process by the
participating funding organisations. Funding is generally allocated according
to the funding rules of each individual agency. Besides, there are joint calls
and evaluations by research performing organisations (RPOs) with foreign
partners, e.g. Programme Inter Carnot Fraunhofer, Helmholtz-Russia or
Helmholtz-CAS Joint Research Groups, Helmholtz International Research Groups.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Germany allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Germany
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RI): European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), European
Synchotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), European XFEL and Institut Laue-Langebin
(ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.1% of GBAORD to the activities
carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint
Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 39 of them (79 %). The country
coordinates ten of them: SHARE-ERIC, IAGOS, EU-OPENSCREEN, EuroBioImaging,
ERINHA, INFRAFRONTIER, MIRRI, XFEL, CTA and FAIR.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these RIs, Germany is
committed to fund 18 of them. They are: CESSDA, CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, ESSurvey ,
SHARE-ERIC, EURO ARGO, IAGOS, ICOS, BBMRI, ECRIN, EU-OPENSCREEN, INFRAFRONTIER,
E-ELT, ESSneutrons, XFEL, CTA, ELI, FAIR.
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Germany is involved in six of the seven consortia that adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries. Germany is hosting SHARE-ERIC, is a member of CLARIN ERIC,
of the ESS ERIC, of BBMRI-ERIC, of EURO-ARGO ERIC, and of ECRIN-ERIC. The legal
basis for implementing a ERIC was adopted in Germany on 7 June 2013.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of RIs, Germany's
Partnership Agreement (PA) with the EU provides for the possibility of spending
Structural Funds on ESFRI projects between 2014 and 2020. The Federal
Government called upon the Länder to include ESFRI projects in their
operational programmes (OP)at Länder level.
Additionally,
according to the 2014 National Reform Programme, the forthcoming National ERA
Strategy will include among the priorities Research Infrastructures.           
The
National Roadmap on Research Infrastructures was published in 2013. It is the
first German overview of priority RI projects that the BMBF is planning to
realise in the coming 10-15 years. The launch of the Roadmap was meant to
support and guide political decisions in terms of research infrastructures
(i.e. for instance large scale research infrastructures of national/European
importance, comprehensive experiments, etc.). The roadmap includes references
to the participation of Germany in the development of the Ris mentioned in the
ESFRI roadmap (see above). Inclusion in the Roadmap is paramount to a German
financial commitment to the project in question. Some expenditure is presented
on a yearly basis and some as global amounts. Timeframes for funding depend on
individual ESFRI projects. Priorities outside of ESFRI are for example:
research vessels, within the research vessel strategy
(Forschungsschiff-Strategie), the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing (which, in
turn, contributes to PRACE), or, W 7-X. An update of the Roadmap is planned so
that further projects can be added, including areas for which other government
departments are responsible (health, environment, energy).
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to RIs, the 'Research in Germany' portal provides an overview
of research and research funding opportunities in Germany, including RI. Access
to RI is commonly possible for any researcher working at the corresponding
Public Reserach Organisations (PROs) (which is operating the RI) or at another
research centre which has a corresponding collaboration agreement, i.e. it is
neither generally limited to researchers of German origin nor to German
research organisations.          
The
research organisations HGF, MPG, WGL and DFG and the German Council of Science
and Humanities contributed to the FP7-funded project 'MERIL, Mapping of the
European Research Infrastructure Landscape'. The MERIL database, which is under
construction, currently lists 119 national RIs that offer transnational access
and are therefore relevant for the ERA.          
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by Germany, access to 65 of them has
been funded by the European Commission. 
Germany
is supporting and taking part in the development of a European Charter of
Access, initiated by ESFRI.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Germany in the Researchers’
Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Germany_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 338 608 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Germany in 2011. This
represents 8.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 9.6 in Germany
compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 62 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
There
is no legal obligation to publish job vacancies on national online platforms,
but most organisations do so. The platform www.academics.de/www.academics.com 
is a central, fee-charging commercial site for job vacancies in academia.
'Academics' is a joint venture for Germany, Austria and Switzerland of the
leading German weekly 'Die Zeit' and the academic journal 'Forschung und Lehre'
and achieves high visibility. It also provides additional services. It is
important for universities and research institutions to publish their job
vacancies on academics.de. Personnel departments at universities then have to
consider whether it is worthwhile for them to publish job vacancies on EURAXESS
as well.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
German Government supports the objectives of the European Charter & Code. 
German
universities have begun to engage in the Human Resources (HR) Strategy for
Researchers (HRS4R) process. In practice, however, the Charter & Code is
not used much as a reference. Reasons include a relatively low awareness of the
Charter & Code as well as the fact that institutions do not see the need
for an additional acknowledgement because the existing regulatory framework and
initiatives such as ‘Total E-Quality’ or ‘Audit familiengerechte Hochschule’ 
cover most areas of the Charter & Code. 
By
May 2014, nine German organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which one had received the "HR Excellence
in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter &
Code.
The
German Government has continuously increased funding for education and research
in recent years and aims to raise expenditure in these areas to 10 % of GDP by
2015. Between 2005 and 2012, the Federal Government increased its funding for
R&D by 52 % and for education by 70 %. The Länder, which are directly
responsible for schools and higher education in Germany, have all maintained or
increased their basic funding for public HEIs. 
Via
the ongoing Helmholtz-Postdoctorate-Programme (HGF), talented young academics
may receive a grant for a period of two to three years after earning their PhD,
enabling them to work independently on a research topic of their own choice and
establish themselves in their field of research. To promote equal opportunities
at least 50 % of the positions in the programme are to be granted to women. The
programme started in 2012 with the funding of 35 postdoctorates. In 2013 20
postdocs were selected for funding. The funding volume of the Initiative and
Networking Fund for this programme is EUR 9 million for the two selection
rounds.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
2.8 in 2011 compared with 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
In
Germany, only universities are legally entitled to grant doctoral degrees. Many
universities have recently established so-called Graduate Academies or Research
Schools that encompass university-wide structures to train doctoral candidates
(sometimes in close cooperation with research organisations), sometimes
including offers for MA students and/or post doctorates). They function as
one-stop information and support centres for doctoral candidates. They offer
and coordinate various programmes for this target group, provide networking
possibilities and ensure good standards in training and supervision.
Thirteen
Helmholtz graduate schools and 21 Helmholtz research schools were funded since
2006. Their aim is to enhance existing training programmes both quantitatively
and qualitatively. Graduate schools are designed to improve the structuring of
the doctoral phase and give doctoral students stable supervision conditions and
an individually agreed qualification programme consisting of scientific and
interdisciplinary elements.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
MS was 5.3 % in Germany compared with 9.1 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 11.2 % in Germany compared
with 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2 %. 
Through
the Recruiting Initiative (HGF), the Helmholtz Association has been creating
extra positions for top level scientists thanks to budget increases. The
initiative aims to recruit from three target groups: outstanding researchers,
women scientists and researchers from abroad. The programme will run until 2015
and encompasses 40 extra positions.
The
DAAD Postdoctoral Programme supports German researchers who carry out
independent research projects at host institutions abroad. Funding is provided
for research stays from 3 to 24 months, including a research fellowship, travel
allowance, family allowance and a re-integration grant.
Universities,
non-university research institutions (particularly Fraunhofer) and the private
sector in Germany are closely interlinked, particularly in the field of
engineering. For example, students are offered the possibility of pursuing a
PhD in applied research in close collaboration with industry. A high level of
third-party funding raised by universities from the private sector and the
right of university employees to pursue secondary employment are additional
indicators of a strong link between business and academic research in Germany. Professors
at universities of applied science are generally expected to have at least five
years of professional experience, three of them outside the university system.
The table below describes measures aimed at encouraging researchers’
inter-sectoral mobility. 
The
Validation of the Innovation Potential of scientific research (VIP) initiative
invites scientists from universities and research institutions to benchmark and
substantiate their research results with respect to their economic benefit. An
innovation mentor with an industrial background is obligatory for each project.
New forms of collaboration are being promoted through the 'Forschungscampus'
(research campus) initiative closely linking academia and industry, and the
'Spitzencluster-Wettbewerb' (Leading- Edge Cluster Competition), which is
intended to keep Germany in the top league of technologically advanced nations.
The high-performance clusters formed by business and science enter into
strategic partnerships based on a common cluster strategy in a particular
technological area. The 10 'Forschungscampi' and 15 'Spitzencluster' provide
young researchers with outstanding opportunities to work at the interface
between science and industry in a challenging and innovative environment.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
In
Germany, general anti-discrimination laws, including the 2006 General Law on
Equal Treatment (Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG)) and Germany's
Federal Bodies Law (Bundesgremienbesetzungsgesetz (BGremBG) of June 1994)
provide for equal opportunities. In general, ‘equal opportunities’ and thus
also the responsibility for ‘equal opportunity commissioners’ in Germany falls
into the competence of the federal Ministry for family, senior citizens, Women
and youth (BMFSFJ). Which has put in place several initiatives to increase
awareness and knowledge of the issue. An annual report on the matter is
published by the German Government (Gleichstellungsbericht der
Bundesregierung). 
The
Higher Education Laws of the Länder also provide for equal opportunities at the
level of universities. Equal opportunities policy is defined as a task for the
institutions' senior management. In addition the Länder have their own
programmes to enhance equal opportunities at universities. The Federal
Government considers that Länder and institutions should find their own
solutions for increasing participation by women and a fixed quota may lead to a
situation in which women researchers in areas where they have so far been
heavily under-represented have to shoulder a disproportionately greater
workload than their male colleagues due to committee duties in addition to
research.          
The
2007 Pact for Research and Innovation (PFI) firmly established the requirement
that research organisations should develop strategies to ensure that women's
research potential is fully used. The target agreements to which the research
organisations commited themselves in 2007 were further developed in 2011. The
Federal Government and the Länder expect the research organisations to
implement the Joint Science Conference (GWK) decision of 2011 on recruitment
and career progression of women by establishing flexible target quotas in
keeping with the 'cascade model' of the DFG's research-oriented standards on
gender equality. The organisations are expected to agree targets at management
level to ensure that the quotas are achieved. Four research organisations, HGF,
FhG, MPG and WGL developed their own specific procedures for applying the
'cascade model' and established target quotas in 2012. The organisations are
expected to implement significant changes in the quantitative representation of
women in the research system, particularly in leading positions. The research
organisations report on the progress was made as part of the annual monitoring
exercise under the Pact.      
The
DFG together with its member institutions adopted and committed itself in 2008
to the'Research-oriented standards on gender equality' for a sustainable gender
equality policy in research and higher education. The goal is to markedly
increase the proportion of women at all scientific career levels. In this
frame, the DFG developed a freely accessible toolbox that contains a collection
of equal opportunity measures. DFG also supports member institutions in
implementating the gender equality standards and assesses their gender equality
strategies and their progress in the field.          
The
Centre of Excellence Women and Science (CEWS) (part of the Leibnitz
Association) is the national hub for realising equal opportunities for women
and men in science and research in Germany. The CEWS aims to increase the
number of women in leading positions at universities and research institutions
and raise the efficiency of political measures aimed at equality. The CEWS aims
to introduce gender mainstreaming in all areas of science and research. It
maintains the FemConsult database, which contains current profiles of several
thousand women academics. With regards to HEI, CEWS rankings of institutions of
higher education based on equality aspects, issued every two years, there is an
established instrument of equal opportunities quality control within the higher
education system.            
Further
equal opportunity evaluations are provides by the Total-E-Quality Advisory Service
(est. 2001), Family Friendly University Audit (est. 1998) and others.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
country has measures supporting return after parental leave. For example,
Section 2 para 5 of the Academic Fixed-Term Contract Law
(Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz) of April 2007 provides that fixed-term
contracts may be extended for parental leave or equivalent. The Federal and
Länder governments have declared providing childcare facilities as a political
goal and provided additional funding. Also since 2007, several general measures
are in place, for instance, the parental leave programme (Elternzeit) and
parental allowance programme (Elterngeld).
The
country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in
research programmes and/or projects. Improvement of equal opportunities has
indeed been included as a central goal of the BMBF large-scale initiatives: the
Initiative for Excellence and the Higher Education Pact 2020. The experts
evaluating proposals have to consider whether the proposed measures can promote
equal opportunities for men and women in research. Since 2008, it has been
possible to apply for ring-fenced funds for equal opportunities measures in all
collaborative projects of the DFG. This money can be used to support women as
project managers, in pursuing their research careers, or making researcher's
workplaces more family-friendly.            
The
country provides incentives for the recruiting female researchers and to
promoting the access of female researchers to senior positions in HEI and other
Research Performing Organisations. To increase the participation of women in
all levels of academic training the Federal Government and the Länder 2007
initiated the female Professors Programme on the basis of a positive appraisal
of their equality policies, Higher education institutions have the opportunity
to receive funding for up to three professorships for women. HEIs are
participating to a great extent. The percentage of women professors almost
doubled between 2002 and 2010 from 8 % to 15 % (She figures 2012). In 2012, the
Federal Government and the Länder decided to continue the female Professors
Programme and fund a second period. The first and second funding period
consisted of EUR150 million each.     
In
Germany the National Pact for Women in MINT Careers (comparable to STEM
Careers) was launched in June 2008 as part of the Federal Government’s 'Get
Ahead through Education' qualifications initiative in order to increase the
percentage of women in mathematics, informatics, natural science and
technology. Recently 180 partners are taking part from academia, research,
industry, politics, associations, labour and management and the media.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
In
addition to the female Professors Programme, the BMBF has an important
programme dedicated to research into gender equality and the gender dimension
in research programmes: Frauen an die Spitze (Women at the Top). Research in
this programme is focused on gender equality issues, the causes of gender
imbalances in leadership positions as well as gender-specific research and
gender innovation in thematic fields (medicine, natural and economic sciences).
The projects are expected to test new action schemes in Germany as a basis for
new approaches towards increasing equal opportunities. Between 2007 and 2015,
116 projects are ste to be funded. The results of those projects serve to develop
new instruments for action that aim to improve gender balance and gender
mainstreaming in research and society.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 99.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, one of the BMBF's central tasks is to tackle
the under-representation of women in leadership positions. It created an 'Equal
Opportunities in Education and Research Division' to deal with this issue.
In
2006, the organisations of the Research Alliance launched a campaign to promote
equal opportunities for men and women in research (Offensive für Chancengleichheit
von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern) (reviewed in May 2012) with the
aim of markedly increasing the proportion of women in leading academic
positions within the following five years. In 2010, women accounted for 21 % of
the members of university bodies and 12 % of senior management positions at
universities were held by women (She figures 2012).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Germany is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the Federal Government has initiated a number
of activities to promote open access such as a dialogue between science
organisations and scientific publishing companies. The Federal Government has
recently incorporated a secondary publication right in the German copyright act
in order to to strengthen open access. Scientists and researchers now have the
legal right to self-archive their publications in the authors version in the
Internet 12 month after the first publication. BMBF also plans to add a clause on
open access to the auxiliary terms and conditions governing its project
funding. 
Through
the Priority Initiative 'Digital Information', the Alliance of German Research
Organisations aims to improve the provision of information in research and
teaching by raising awareness and putting forward recommendations and
guidelines for the implementation of open access and promoting funding for open
access publications           
The
Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Scientific Knowledge was introduced by MPG
in 2003 and was signed by 53 German Institutions, including the big research
organisations including the German Rectors’ Conference which represents 258
universities and other HEIs. The signatory institutions are obliged to support
open access.
Since
2006, the DFG has guidelines for providing open access to project results. The
DFG provides lump sums for covering publication costs including open access
fees and also has a funding programme 'Open Access Publizieren' by which
universities can apply for funding in order to cover open access publication
charges by university-based authors.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, Germany supports it.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations
making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research
data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, the Federal Government gives high priority to the
topic of scientific information infrastructures, because they play a key role
in the storage of scientific knowledge and in making it accessible. The German
Council of Science and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat) issued recommendations for
the further development of scientific information infrastructures in July 2012.
The Federal Government and the Länder have appointed a working group on the
implementation of the Council's recommendations, which will also review the
various European Commission proposals.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private
sectors, Germany has included knowledge transfer strategies at federal and
regional level in the High-Tech Strategy 2020 (national innovation strategy)
respectively in the Innovation Strategies of the Länder. One of the priorities
of the High-Tech Strategy is to improve cooperation between science and
industry so that scientific knowledge can be transferred more quickly and
applied on a commercial scale more efficiently.  
The
Higher Education Laws in all of Germany's 16 Länder have now identified
knowledge and technology transfer as a task for institutions of higher
education. Moreover, the Länder Hesse, Lower Saxony, North-Rhine Westphalia
(NRW) and Thuringia have taken up the development of an intellectual property
strategy in the target and performance agreements between the Länder and the
universities.   
Several
institutions are devoted to knowledge transfer to the business sector, such as
Fraunhofer, technical universities, and universities of applied sciences. A
prerequisite for becoming a professor at universities of applied sciences is
usually three years of work experience outside the higher education sector. A
Code of Practice for HEIs and other PROs (IP Charter) has been compiled by the
Joint Science Conference (GWK) and has become national strategy.          
TechnologieAllianz
unites patent marketing agencies and technology transfer agencies in a single
network. The nationwide association representing over 200 scientific institutes
provides enterprises with access to the entire range of innovative research
results from German universities and non-university research institutions.
A
number of different competitions and funding initiatives are implementing the
High-Tech Strategy, including the Innovation Alliances partnering academia and
industry, the Cluster-Platform Germany with programmes the Leading-Edge Cluster
Competition and go-Cluster, the 'Research Campus - public-private partnership
for innovations', the newly launched '2020 - partnership for innovation'
funding programme, and the 'Validation of the Innovation Potential of
Scientific Research-VIP' which stimulates knowlegde transfer by public research
organisations. Other programmes such as ‘Research at Universities of Applied
Sciences Programme’ (prolonged until 2018), ‘Networks of Competence scheme’ ZIM
Programme for SMEs and Industrial Collective Research Programme programmes
support academia-industry cooperation for knowledge transfer and innovation.
Some other programmes are often funded at the Länder level and some by the
Economics Ministries both at federal (for example the programme KOINNO – since
March 2014 in cooperation with Switzerland) or Länder level.
Knowledge
transfer measures of science organisations that signed the Pact for Research
and Innovation are monitored, however, there is no national monitoring system
is in place.
Strategic
partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in
Germany. Innovation Alliances represent a new instrument for research and
innovation policy within the framework of the High-Tech strategy. Currently,
there are nine Innovation Alliances and a large number of “strategic
partnerships” created by the BMBF, the scientific community and industry. The
Leading-Edge Cluster Competition (Spitzencluster-Wettbewerb) is aimed at
high-performance clusters formed by business and science that enter into
strategic partnerships. The Research Campus programme contributes to knowledge
circulation by enhancing partnerships, which are aiming to develop new
technologies in areas with high technological complexity and a great potential
for radical innovation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 79 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
The
Federal Government has developed a new Information and Communication and
Technology (ICT) strategy for the digital future of Germany: Digital Germany
2015. It sets out the Government ICT policy framework, i.e. the priorities,
tasks and projects for the period up to 2015. The strategy, which also deals
with R&D and education aspects, will be carried out in close interaction
among policymakers, industry and scientists. The Federal Ministry of Economics
and Technology, BMWi, is in charge of coordinating the implementation under the
specific purviews of the various ministries. A major role here is played by the
National IT Summit.        
The
Federal Government in Germany will develop a Digital Agenda 2014-2017 as a
cross-departemental strategy to address the various issues of digitisation in a
comprehensive approach. The action field 'Research, Education and Culture' 
will help the areas of education, science and research to make better use of
the opportunities of digitisation offers, e.g. ensuring open access to
scientific information and improve scholarly communication. 
The
Deutsche Forschungsnetz (DFN) is the German National Research and Education
Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting
the needs of the research and education communities within the country and
essential to make digital services possible.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides premium services.  The recommendations
of the Wissenschaftsrat for the further development of scientific information
infrastructures in Germany up to 2020 also refers to a number of issues related
to the electronic identity and digital research services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations
providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research
collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Germany
was already a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member
of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations, through DFN. To date, electronic
identities that are not linked to a specific institution are only available to
researchers in Germany to a limited extent, via their national identity card.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 53.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 127 research performing organisations in Germany answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 22.8% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Germany shows that 65.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 26.8 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 7.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 90.3 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 8.6 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.1 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
For
the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it
should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by ministries
without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence the
percentage is relatively high compared to official figures.
For
the indicator 'Public funding allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D
as % of total budget in the sample' it should be noted that only data for food
& agiculture are available. As a consequence the percentage is relatively
low.
For
the indicator ' Share of funders which can base their project based research
and development funding decisions on peer reviews' only data are available for
the food sector. As a consequence the percentage is relatively low.
For
the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst
research performing organisations' there are hardly any data. As a consequence
the percentages are low.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Strategy of the Federal Government on the European Research Area (ERA) - Guidelines and National Roadmap || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 SME Innovative || 2007 ||   ||   
 Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance || 2005 ||   ||   
 DFG - German Research Council (Förderverfahren der DFG) ||   ||   ||   
 Project funding (programmes) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Funding procedures of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) since 1951, regularly updated ||   ||   ||   
 Non-university research institutes (Außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen) - HGF, FHG, MPG, WGL (different dates) ||   ||   ||   
 R&I funding system: general application of international peer review principles ||   ||   ||   
 Initiative for excellence (Excellenz Initiative) || 2012 || X ||   
 Excellence Initiative  for Cutting-edge Research at Institutions of Higher Education || 2014 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Academic Freedom Act || 2012 || X ||   
 Higher Education Pact (Hochschulpakt) - reform initiative || 2011 ||   ||   
 Leading-Edge Cluster Top Cluster Competition || 2007 ||   ||   
 R&I funding system: project funding || 2006 ||   ||   
 R&I funding system: institutional funding ||   ||   ||   
 Institutional funding (non-university research institutes) - Fraunhofer Gesellschaft (since 1949) ||   ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding (G8 Research Councils) || 2010 ||   ||   
 High-Tech Strategy 2020 (since 2006) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Internationalisation Strategy || 2008 ||   ||   
 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) || 2008 ||   ||   
 French-German Agenda 2020 (since 2010) || 2014 || X || X 
 ERA-NET ERA-NET+ || 2006 ||   ||   
 Upper Rhine Bi-national Metropolitan Region science programme || 2011 ||   ||   
 Participation in Article 185 measures ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 D-A-CH’ agreement ("Lead Agency" process) - DACH Abkommen || 2009 ||   ||   
 The G8 Research Councils Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding || 2010 ||   ||   
 EIROs - participation of Germany ||   ||   ||   
 Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the preparation and implementation of transnational calls for proposals (Leitfaden des BMBF zur transnationalen Zusammenarbeit) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Participation in Article 185 measures || 2007 ||   ||   
 The Joint Initiative for Research and Innovation II: Internationalisation strategies of the science organisations || 2009 ||   ||   
 Internationalisation Strategy ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National research infrastructure roadmap 2013 (Roadmap für Forschungsinfrastrukturen – Pilotprojekt des BMBF) || 2013 || X || X 
 ESFRI - German contribution ||   ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Internationalisation Strategy || 2008 ||   ||   
 Implementation EC Regulation on ERIC || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 EURAXESS Germany portal ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Foreign Skills Approval and Recognition Law || 2012 || X ||   
 Plan to improve the social security and pension situation of mobile researchers || 2010 ||   ||   
 Report on the Promotion of Young Researchers (BuWin) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Principles for appointing research staff by non-university institutions (HGF, FhG, MPG, WGL) ||   ||   ||   
 Programmes encouraging excellent foreign scientists to spend research periods in Germany ||   ||   ||   
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 Cooperative Doctoral Programme (Baden-Württemberg) || 2010 ||   ||   
 International and inter-sectoral mobility 
 Programmes offering financial support to German researchers to spend periods abroad ||   ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungs-gesetz) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Center of Excellence Women and Science (CEWS) || 2000 ||   ||   
 Female professors’ programme || 2007 ||   ||   
 Woman at the Top (Frauen an die Spitze) || 2006 ||   ||   
 General Anti-Discrimination Act - Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG) || 2006 ||   ||   
 National Pact for Woman in MINT careers || 2008 ||   ||   
 Higher Education Laws in the German Länder (Hochschulgesetze der Länder) ||   ||   ||   
 Targets for gender balance set by Joint Science Conference (GWK) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Programmes at Länder level to enhance equal opportunities at universities ||   ||   ||   
 Campaign to promote equal opportunities for men and women in research (Offensive für Chancengleichheit von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities || 2003 ||   ||   
 The German Research Foundation (DFG) has tied Open Access to its funding policy || 2006 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Research Campus: public-private Partnership for Innovation || 2011 ||   ||   
 go-innovativ’ -Vouchers for Innovation Consulting and Management || 2010 ||   ||   
 Validation of Innovation Potentials - VIP || 2010 ||   ||   
 Research at Universities of Applied Sciences || 2005 ||   ||   
 IGF -Promotion of Joint Industrial Research and Initiative Programme Future Technologies for SMEs (ZUTECH) || 1954 ||   ||   
 Innovation Alliances || 2007 ||   ||   
 National Agency for Women Start-ups Activities and Services || 2004 ||   ||   
 EXIST - Start-ups from Science (also: EXIST - University-based business Start-ups) || 1999 ||   ||   
 ERP Start-up Fund || 1995 ||   ||   
 High-tech Start-up Fund || 2005 ||   ||   
 Networks of Competence || 1999 ||   ||   
 Fostering the innovation dimension of research: SIGNO, EXIST ||   ||   ||   
 National strategy to implement the Commission Recommendation on management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and on a Code of practice for universities and other public research organisations (IP Charter) by the Joint Science Confe || 2010 ||   ||   
 TechnologieAllianz network || 2001 ||   ||   
 Regional laws on knowledge and technology transfer as a task for German institutions of Higher Education ||   ||   ||   
 Secondary publication right implemented in German Copyright law || 2006 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Digital Germany 2015 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Advice and federal working group with the German Länder on scientific information infrastructures (on-going) || 2012 || X ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Initiatives towards e-identity (DFN-AAI, eduGAIN) ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
Ministry of Higher Education and Science has the main responsibility for
research and innovation (R&I) in Denmark. However, the Ministry of Business
and Growth has certain tasks related to business development, and several
sectorial ministries – such as  the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building,
the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, the Ministry of the
Environment, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – have
larger research, development and innovation (RD&I)            programmes.
In addition, the ministries have specific agencies that implement the
respective policies. 
The
main R&I funding comes from the Danish National Research Foundation, the
Danish Council for Independent Research, the Danish Innovation Foundation, and
several sectorial R&D programmes. Another key funding source is the
University Basic Research Funding, i.e. the allocated basic university grants
provided to the universities from the annual national budget. In 2013, the
Danish Government started in 2013 a process aimed at combining into the Danish
Innovation Foundation the following bodies: the Danish Council for Strategic
Research, the Danish Council for Technology and Innovation, and the Danish
Advanced Technology Foundation. This reorganisation was partly based on input
from the European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) Peer Review
from 2012. In October, an agreement was reached stipulating that the new
innovation fund shall be equipped with an annual budget of €200 million. The
fund has been operational since April 2014.
The
main knowledge producers in the Danish R&D system are the universities
along with a few Government research institutes and a network of private,
non-profit R&D organisations. The main collaboration partners of the
private sector are nine institutes, belonging to the Advanced Technology Group
(“Godkendte Teknologiske Serviceinstitutter”).
The
country has adopted a national strategy for Research and Innovation. In 2013,
the Danish Government launched Denmark’s first comprehensive innovation
strategy “Denmark – Nation of Solutions” based on collaborative efforts between
the involved ministries, i.e. the Ministry of Higher Education and Science, the
Ministry of Business and Growth and other relevant sectorial ministries, as
well as stakeholders from the Danish innovation system. In connection with the
new innovation strategy the Danish Government has started a process that led to
the creation of the first INNO+ catalogue presented in September 2013 which
defines 21 concrete areas for R&I geared towards finding solutions to the
grand societal challenges. 
The
Danish National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 describes new support instruments
to promote R&I to, such as societal partnerships, tax incentives, SMEs
activities and cluster policy.
Denmark
has also been engaged in a process called RESEARCH2020 that identifies areas of
effort that form the basis for the political prioritization of funds for
strategic research, basis for decision making for the prioritization of funds.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Denmark represented EUR 451 per inhabitant
in 2012 more than twice and a half higher than the EU28 average (EUR 179). In
2013, GBAORD per inhabitant increased to reach EUR 455. In 2012, total GBAORD
corresponded to 1.7% of total government expenditures and 1% of Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Denmark has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of
R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Denmark, measured as percentage
of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison, in the
EU27 the rate of growth of GBAORD measured as percentage of public government
expenditure evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved
positively in Denmark even when it regressed at EU28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
According
to a Joint Research Centre-Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
(JRC-IPTS) study on European university funding and financial autonomy (2011),
the Danish universities funding consists of 59 % core funding, 12 % competitive
funding, 4 % industrial funding, 1% non-profit sector funding and 2 % EU
funding. However, no official statistics on this topic exist.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
Allocation
of research funds is based on the principles of international peer review.
Research projects are selected on the basis of the quality of proposals and
expected results and they are subject to external peer review. 
For
example, the Danish Council for Strategic Research, which is now a part of the
Danish Innovation Foundation,  has established a peer review panel that is
intended to strengthen the quality of the project reviews. Assessments made by
members of the peer review panel are complemented with assessments provided by
the council committees of internationally recognised academics. The Danish
Council for Independent Research uses peer review panels and individual peer
reviews for assessing applications. Assessments made by the peer review panels
and individual reviews are complemented with assessments provided by research
council members who are also internationally recognized academics.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Danish
universities’ funding is based on a benchmark made on the basis of
internationally recognised criteria and performance contracts with the Ministry
of Higher Education and Science.  In June 2009, a political agreement was
reached on a new distribution model for core funding to the universities. The
new distribution model is a modification of the former 50–40–10 model, which
covered indicators for education, external funding and PhD graduates. The new
model includes bibliometric indicators and has been introduced gradually over
the period 2010–2012. The distribution for 2012 is as follows: 45% is based on
education appropriations, 20% is based on external funding of R&D
activities, 25% is based on bibliometric indicators, and 10% is based on PhD
graduates.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 22.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It also strongly supports
bilateral and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 16.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Denmark allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Denmark
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
higher than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), Denmark’s total share of participation is 2.4% and the country received
2.6% of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 170 per inhabitant (EU
average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.8% of the Gross
Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last
available data) (EU average 3% of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all the 10 on-going
initiatives. Denmark is the coordinator of Agriculture, Food Security and
Climate Change.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in four of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in more than 40 ERA-NETs, of which 15 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in seven ERA-NET
Plus actions - of which five are still running - in areas with high European
added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals. Denmark is coordinating three existing ERA-NETs.
Denmark
is actively cooperating with other Nordic countries in joint programmes and
institutions within the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordic cooperation
involves Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as well as the three
autonomous areas, the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands. The
organisation of the Nordic collaboration in research and innovation is based on
two main pillars: NordForsk (research) and Nordic Innovation (formerly The
Nordic Innovation Centre, NICE). In 2008, the Nordic Prime Ministers initiated
the Top-level Research Initiative (TRI), which is until now the largest joint
Nordic research and innovation initiative that has a research focus on the
climate, environment and energy fields.
In
2014 initiatives to strengthen the Arctic research were taken. The goal is to
enhance national coordination of arctic research, arctic education and
activities related to Arctic research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the Ministry
of Higher Education and Science initiated several cooperation agreements and
different policy measures to ensure an improved exchange between knowledge
communities in Denmark and outside Europe. Among these are Memorandums of
Understanding on research and innovation with countries such as Turkey and
South Korea.
Denmark
has developed specific strategies for Brazil, Russia, India and China
(BRIC-countries) to improve trade and investment, in fields such as climate and
energy, welfare, architecture, research, education and food. Denmark has
established innovation centres in hotspots around the world and as part of its
national Innovation Strategy. To complement its already existing innovation
centers in Shanghai, Silicon Valley and Munich, Denmark opened three new
innovation centres in New Delhi, Bangalore, Seoul and Sao Paulo in 2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Denmark
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is similar to the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Regarding
cross border access to funding, Danish schemes are open to researchers based
abroad, regardless of their nationality, provided that their research is judged
to be of benefit to Danish research. The Research Council law allows the
national research councils to allocate up to 20 % of their funds to
international initiatives. These initiatives are allowed to administer the
funds on behalf of the Danish research councils on a real common pot model as
long as it benefits Danish research and fulfils other general principles.
Furthermore, the Council funds are generally available to international
researchers.
The
Danish Council for Independent Research and the National Research Foundation
participate in Science Europe. The Danish Council for Strategic Research (now a
part of the Danish Innovation Foundation) has signed the letter of intent
“Money Follows Researcher”, which allows researchers to move to other countries
and take the remainder of any awarded grant with them.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 87.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Denmark allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Denmark
participates in the following large international research infrastructures: the
European Space Agency (ESA), the Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European
Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO),
the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and the Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL). 
The
country contributes 0,86% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN,
EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the JRC (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures (RI)
included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI)
Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 14 of them (29%
of the RI in the roadmap). The country coordinates one RI, namely WINDSCANNER.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of ESFRI Research
Infrastructures, Denmark is committed to funding : CESSDA, CLARIN-ERIC,
DARIAH,  E-ELT, EPOS, EATRIS, ELIXIR, (INSTRUCT), ESRF UPGRADE, ESSneutrons,
XFEL and (PRACE).
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Denmark is involved in three of the nine consortia which adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries, namely CLARIN ERIC, EATRIS ERIC and DARIAH ERIC.
To
support the development and implementation of Research Infrastructures, the
availability of high quality research infrastructures has been addressed in
policy actions over several years. Public investments in research and
innovation have been prioritised and budgeted for over the last years to ensure
predictability and long term impact.
The
national roadmap for Research Infrastructures presents a complete and
prioritised catalogue of the national needs for research infrastructures in the
short term and charts a strategic direction for national initiatives in the
field.
The
roadmap includes clear references to the participation of Denmark in the
development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. The
national roadmap will be updated in 2015 in parallel with the ESFRI update
process. 
The
total Danish funding committed to the construction and operation of the
research infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap since 2006 is estimated
at DKR 720 million.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by Denmark, access to four of them has
been funded by the European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Denmark in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Denmark_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 37,944 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Denmark in 2011. This
represents 13.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 13.0 in Denmark
compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7
In
2012, 65% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
common government rules on posting positions and making appointments, including
requirements on the prohibition of discrimination, open recruitment and
objective justifications, apply to scientific positions. For scientific
employees, the rules are supplemented by the Ministerial Order on the
Appointment of Academic Staff at Universities (2012). Under this Order,
positions at professor and associate professor level must be advertised
internationally, and an assessment takes place according to local rules at each
university. The Order is designed to increase international mobility as well as
open competition, hence providing Danish universities with the best possible
talent. The Rector may grant an exemption from this provision in the event of
special circumstances of an academic nature. A non-prioritised, reasoned and
written assessment of the applicants’ academic qualifications is submitted to
the Rector. The committee must submit its assessment within a time limit set by
the Rector. In the event of differences of opinion between the members of the
committee, this must be stated in the assessment. 
Under
the Public Administration Act (1985), the applicant can always require a
written explanation of the decision. The applicant has the right to appeal to
the institution to which he/she has applied for a job.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
All
Danish universities have signed the ‘Charter & Code’ and are to a high
degree following its principles, which are perceived as normal practice within
Danish research institutions. By May 2014, three Danish organisations were
involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which
one had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their
progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
The
Job Structure for Academic Staff at Universities, the Collective Agreement for
Academics in the State and the Act on Universities (in particular, points 2, 15
and 29) constitute a researcher statute by addressing wage and employment
conditions (for instance pension schemes, maternity/paternity leave and
long-term illness) and career prospects. In 2013 the Job Structure for Academic
Staff at Universities was revised and resulted in an updated and more
contemporary job structure. It includes provisions for a coherent researcher
career progression, significantly revising also the principal position of
assistant professor. A permanent assistant professorship may now be granted for
a period of up to six years (only four years previously). As part of the
position, the assistant professor may transfer directly to a position of
associate professor/senior researcher provided that the employee is recommended
for assessment and is deemed qualified. The revision has been welcomed by the
Danish universities which will use the permanent assistant professorship as a
tenure track position.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
2.3 in 2011 compared to 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
The
Danish PhD Programme (under the Ministerial Order on the PhD Programme at the
Universities, 2007) is designed by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science
to provide young researchers with skills to contribute to a knowledge-based
economy and society in Denmark. The PhD Programme is a research programme aimed
at training PhD students at an international level to undertake research,
development and teaching assignments in the private and public sectors for
which a broad knowledge of research is required.
The
regulation on PhD programmes was amended in 2010 in order to improve the
possibilities for universities to enter into mutually binding collaboration in
research and education with foreign universities. The regulation was amended
again in 2013 in order to focus on providing the best opportunities for
international collaboration in PhD education. On 1 September 2012, a publicly
available website was launched in English with short presentations of PhD
courses offered at all graduate schools in Denmark (http://phdcourses.dk/).
This website gives PhD students an overview of the total offer of PhD courses
in Denmark across universities.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 13.8% in Denmark compared with 9.1% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 17.7% in Denmark
compared with 14.4% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 24.2%. 
In
2014, an action plan ‘Denmark – an attractive study destination - How to
attract and retain talent from abroad’ was launched as part of the government’s
effort to increase the internationalisation of higher education. The action
plan includes concrete initiatives to make international graduates’ transition
to the Danish labour market easier. International graduates from non-EU/EEA
countries who have completed a Master’s or PhD programme in Denmark, should
have the opportunity to apply for a start-up permit giving them the right to
seek employment and work in Denmark for two years. A start-up permit will also
– unlike the current Greencard scheme – allow the graduate the opportunity to
start their own company. The plan will also ensure that all fully-fledged PhDs
are granted a six-month jobseeker’s residence permit, and the rules for
applying for a residence permit are simplified.
The
Industrial PhD Programme aims to offer doctoral training in cooperation with
the industry sector. It is a three-year research project and research training
programme with an industrial focus conducted jointly by a private company, an
industrial PhD student and a university. The student is employed by the company
and enrolled at the university. The company hires the Industrial PhD for the
three-year duration of the project as a full-time employee on ordinary terms
for salaried employees. The salary is agreed between the student and the
company, and must correspond as a minimum to the pay rate of the collective
agreement for PhD students employed by the Danish State. The company receives a
subsidy to cover approximately half the student’s salary, and the enrolling
university receives a subsidy to cover tuition fees. The Programme includes a
compulsory business course so that students understand the commercial aspects
of research and innovation projects. It inspired the European Parliament to fund
the kick-start of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie European Industrial
doctorates.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
General
legislation on gender equality
The
Minister for Gender Equality is responsible for the Government's overall
activities in the field of gender equality and co-ordinates the equality work
of other ministries. 
On
a general level, the Danish Gender Equality Act (GEA), as revised in 2013, stipulates
among other things that boards, assemblies of representatives or similar
collective management bodies within the public administration ought to have an
equal gender balance. This is also the case for public research councils,
universities etc. 
In
addition to gender equality targets, institutions and companies in public
administration are obliged to formulate gender equality policies concerning the
underrepresented gender on a managerial level. This is only a requirement for
institutions and companies with 50 employees or more e.g. all Danish
universities.
The
country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in
research programmes and/or projects. The Councils monitor the gender balance in
their funding. Gender specific measures are included in the performance
contracts with universities, where all universities are encouraged to include a
focus area working for equal opportunities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 22.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 17.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
country provides incentives for the recruitment of female researchers.  Some
Danish universities included gender equality in their development contracts
with the ministries. This practice potentially results in an extra bonus, which
is seen as an incentive. Danish Gender Equality Act specially allocates an
additional professorship chair (off faculty plan) if a department reaches a
certain number of female professor appointees. Also the new Danish ‘Sapere
Aude’ programme aims to encourage more women to become research leaders.
For
example, the “Young women devoted to a university career programme” has been
earmarked to ensure a more gender mix in research environments in Denmark (NRP
2014).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
country has a dedicated budget for programmes funding women/gender studies. The
annual report form the Research Forum and the Research Councils will for the
future include relevant gender divided statistics.
In
2013, the Council of Independent Research commissioned a study on the role of
gender in research and excellence (Det Frie Forskningsråd, 2013), mapping
gender aspects and differences in the Danish R&I system.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 60.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey indicated that they do
not support gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Gender
equality at the Danish universities
The
Ministry of Higher Education and Science and the 8 Danish universities sign
development contracts every three years. Some of the Danish universities have
included goals and activities for gender equality in their development
contracts with the ministry. 
The
ministry is supervising the universities on a regular basis. In 2013 and 2014,
the ministry has systematically surveyed the status for gender equality at each
university in the supervision
Some
of the universities have initiated their own gender equality initiatives after
a special autorisation of the Gender Equality Act (GEA). E.g. the University of
Copenhagen has implemented a gender equality action plan for 2008-13 e.g.
giving economic incentives to faculties hiring female professors. 
Gender
equality and the Danish research councils 
The
Danish Council for Independent Research has in particular emphasised gender
equality in their work and practice. In 2013, the Danish Council for
Independent Research commissioned a study on the role of gender in research and
excellence mapping gender aspects and differences in the Danish research system
with special focus on applications to and grants from the Danish Council for
Independent Research. The study was followed by a conference on the role of
gender in research and excellence. In 2013, the Council also adopted an
equality policy. The policy set goals for both the success rates of grants
awarded by the council and for the composition of the council itself and its
subcouncils. 
In
2014 the council presented a call for the new “Younger women Devoted to a
University career Programme (YDUN-programme)” in order to stimulate the
research careers of female researchers by encouraging them to apply for
research funding at the council. 
The
council also issue gender divided statistics regarding the awarded grants.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 21.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Denmark is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
The
Danish Government supports open access. An Open Access Committee was appointed
under the steering committee for Denmark's Electronic Research Library (DEFF).
In March 2011 the Open Access Committee published recommendations for
implementing of open access in Denmark (Danish Agency for Libraries and Media,
2011).  Based on the recommendations, the Danish Government adopted a policy on
open access to research articles in June 2014. The coordination and development
of the national policy will be implemented by a national steering committee
appointed by the Minister for Higher Education and Science in April 2014.
The
implementation of Open Access is well under way among Danish universities,
public research councils and foundations. In June 2012, public research
councils and foundations implemented a joint open access-policy. This policy
advocates green open access and requires the deposit of a digital version of
the research article to a repository after the article has been accepted.
Furthermore, seven out of the eight universities in Denmark have introduced
Open Access policies.
Related
to open access to publications, initiatives exist at national level through
soft requirements to foster the development of open access to scientific
publications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 88.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, in Denmark, there are no open access and preservation
policies related to research data. Though, some initiatives relating to OA to
data have been implemented. The awareness of OA is mainly within the research
library community, but the interest in the topic is growing in the university
administrations and research policy. Three Danish universities have policies
and other universities are engaging in on-going work regarding OA. Furthermore,
in recent years it has been a requirement that researchers receiving grants
from the Danish Research Council for Independent Research, must hand over their
datasets to the Danish National Archives, which in turn have a an online
platform for re-using researcher data and an advisory service to facilitate
reuse of data. Though, the requirement to handover datasets is not enforced
rigorously. Furthermore, all researcher datasets generated through Statistics
Denmark are accessible online through Statistics Denmark after a waiting
period. However, this does not include data that has been provided by the
researchers themselves. It only applies to the registry data from Statistics
Denmark.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
Research
infrastructures funded by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science are open
to all Danish researchers. In principle this also includes the data which is
generated from the research infrastructure.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, regulatory policies exist to support knowledge transfer between public
research institutions and industry, the establishment of research-based
enterprises and cooperation between public research institutions, associations
and foundations. 
Knowledge
transfer is strongly embedded in the new Innovation Strategy Denmark adopted in
2013.
In
conjunction with the establishment of the Danish Innovation Foundation in 2013,
a broad evaluation of the knowledge cooperation between knowledge institutions
and businesses is to be conducted during 2014 with the aim of assessing the
need of new measures in the field.[NRP 2014]
In
connection with the new innovation strategy the Danish Government has started a
process that led to the creation of the first INNO+ catalogue presented in
September 2013, which provides funding organisations with specific funding
lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer.
There
are several funding instruments targeted at increasing R&D cooperation
between the business sector and public research organisations.  Inter-sectoral
mobility of researchers is high in Denmark in comparison to other EU-28
countries - approximately 80 % of the industrial PhD programmes contribute to
improved mobility between universities and companies while only around 20 % of
traditional PhDs gets positions in the private sector. Moreover, public-private
knowledge transfer is ensured by the involvement of representatives from the
private sector in the governance of higher education institutions. In several
universities, the majority of board members are external members and some of
them come from the private sector.
Strategic
partnership and the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between
academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Denmark.  Some
examples may be illustrated by the following measures:
-           Clusters
- Innovation Network Denmark supports networking and matchmaking activities
with the private sector
-           Industrial
Post-doc programme supports the implementation of research training agreements
with private sector organisations
-           Innovation
Assistant (Knowledge Pilot) scheme supports structured programmes for
placements in the private sector for researchers
-           Innovation
Voucher Scheme incentivises more SME’s to require knowledge from research
institutions
-           The
IPR Package developed by the Danish Patent and Trademark Office and the five
regional Growth Houses supports IPR needs 
There
are also measures on technology transfer, science parks and university business
incubators in Denmark.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 63.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support
national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Denmark has had a national
research and education network – NREN – for a number of years which is
essential to make digital services possible. For the last decade the Ministry
of Higher Education and Science has also provided funding and an organisational
structure for handling High Performance Computing (HPC) and Grid computing and
other e-science matters.  In recent years, the NREN and the HPC organisations
have been merged into the Danish E-infrastructure Collaboration – DEIC –
thereby creating one single governing board handling all e-infrastructure
issues of national relevance. The mission and task of DEIC is to strengthen and
facilitate e-Science collaboration, to contribute to coherence, synergy and
cost-effectiveness, to ensure that Danish e-science is at a high international
level, to formulate and implement strategies and initiatives, to develop new
instruments for challenges regarding HPC, networks, storage, etc. and to
support and coordinate training and counselling activities on e-Science.
DEIC
is a collaboration between Universities, University Colleges and other
educational and scientific institutions in Denmark plus the Ministry of Higher
Education and Science.  The establishment of a single entity creates a much
more coherent e-science policy, more focus on total cost of ownership and needs
of scientists. It also ensures that all matters of e-Science and E-infrastructure
investment becomes a strategic priority of Danish scientific institutions. 
Denmark’s
Electronic Research Library (DEFF) is an organisational and technological
collaboration between the research libraries, the education libraries and the
special libraries, co-financed and co-governed by the Ministry of Culture, the
Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Higher Education and Science.
The
objective of DEFF is to enhance the development of a network of electronic
libraries that make their electronic and information resources available to the
users in a cohesive and simple way.
DEFF
funds joint development projects, development of the infrastructure and
administers joint purchases of licenses. DEFF may provide subsidies for
international activities. DEFF negotiates and signs contracts for electronic
licenses on behalf of the research libraries.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides Premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 70.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 28.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Denmark
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) Partners' federations.
In
Danish academia a Single Sign-On system called WAYF (Where Are You From) has
been established. WAYF permits using one single login to access several web
based services. With the WAYF infrastructure, people from the research and
educational sector in Denmark can reuse user name and password from their
institution to access services outside the institution itself.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 29 research performing organisations in Denmark answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 33.4% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Denmark shows that 16.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 56.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 28.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 71.4 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 28.2 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.3 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
It
should be noted that the low results observed in several indicators for RPOs is
due on the one hand to the absence of some important organisations among the
ones which answered the survey. On the other hand, the organisations which
answered the survey did not always provide the information requested for
several issues (i.e. open access to publications, gender).
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Innovation strategy "Denmark - Nation of Solutions" || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Peer Review College of the Danish Council for Strategic Research || 2012 || X ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Forks2020 process || 2013 || X || X 
 New university funding model || 2013 || X || X 
 Finance Act Agreement || 2013 || X || X 
 RESEARCH2020 catalogue || 2013 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Openness of National Research Council funding ||   ||   ||   
 Funding schemes open to researchers abroad ||   ||   ||   
 Funding provided by the Nordic Innovation Centre (NICE) || 2012 || X ||   
 Money follows researcher (MFR) initiative in Denmark || 2009 ||   ||   
 Top-level Research Initiative || 2008 ||   ||   
 Collaboration agreements ||   ||   ||   
 Strategic Research Alliance Strategic Network Project scheme ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National research infrastructure roadmap || 2011 ||   ||   
 Globalisation Fund || 2006 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 START-scheme ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess in Denmark ||   ||   ||   
 Ministerial order on the appointment of academic staff at universities || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementation of "Charter for Researchers" and "Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers" || 2009 ||   ||   
 The Charter and Code were debated by the Human Resources group, the Danish Committee of University Directors and the Danish Rectors’ Conference. || 2009 ||   ||   
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 Industrial PhD Program || 2002 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Council of Independent Research Conference on the role of gender in research and excellence || 2013 || X || X 
 Gender Equality Act (GEA) (revision) || 2013 || X || X 
 Younger women Devoited to a University career Programme || 2014 || X || X 
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open Access Committee || 2011 ||   ||   
 Joint Open Access Policy || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Globalisation Fund || 2010 ||   ||   
 Innovation strategy "Denmark - Nation of Solutions" || 2013 || X || X 
 Small and medium-sized businesses initiative for interaction between SMEs and knowledge institutions || 2011 ||   ||   
 Strategic Platforms for Innovation and Research (SPIR) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Act on Inventions at Public Research Institutions || 1999 ||   ||   
 Act on Technology Transfer at Public Research Institutions || 2004 ||   ||   
 National Network for Technology Transfer ||   ||   ||   
 INNO+ Catalogue || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Danish e-Infrastructure Cooperation (DeIC) || 2012 || X ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
Ministry of Education and Research (MER) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs
and Communications (MEAC) share the overall responsibility for research and
innovation (R&I) policy in Estonia. Both are responsible for strategic
planning (including policy studies), implementing the policies in cooperation
with the intermediate bodies, as well as supervising and evaluating the policy
implementation. But, while MER is responsible for research and education
policies, financing and evaluating research institutes and coordinating
international cooperation in research, MEAC supervises support for and funding
of industrial research and development (R&D), as well as planning,
coordinating and implementing the innovation policy. Two permanent advisory
bodies (the Research Policy Committee and the Research Competence Council)
provide advice to MER, while the Innovation Policy Commission advises MEAC. In
addition, the Research and Development Council (R&D Council) is an expert
consultative body that advises the Government on R&D and innovation
matters. All policy documents on the way for approval by the Government have to
pass through this R&D Council.
Estonia
has adopted a national strategy for R&I. Research, development and
innovation (RD&I) strategic objectives and principles of management and
financing are set in the new RDI Strategy (‘Knowledge-based Estonia’) for
2014-2020, launched in January 2014. This third RDI Strategy is supplemented by
an implementation plan that provides a predictable policy framework for short
and medium-term planning, via annual implementation plans, investment plans,
etc. While the previous strategy primarily focused on developing Estonia's
capability in RD&I, the new strategy for 2014-2020 focuses on tapping into
the created potential and creates good framework conditions for developing and
focusing on the social and economic effects of RD&I. In the setting of
priorities, the methodology of smart specialisation served as a basis. The
strategy identifies four key goals:
•
For high-level and diverse Estonian research,
•
For research and development (R&D) activity to be conducted in the interest
of the Estonian society and economy,
•
For R&D to make the structure of the economy more knowledge intensive,
•
And for Estonia to be active and visible in international cooperation in
RD&I.
In
addition, the ‘Entrepreneurship growth strategy 2014-2020’ that focuses on
innovation in enterprises and also covers also cooperation between enterprises
and R&D institutions, was launched in October 2013.
It
should also be noticed that the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation (CSR) for
Estonia invites to 'Further intensify prioritisation and specialisation in the
research and innovation systems and enhance cooperation between businesses,
higher education and research institutions to contribute to international
competitiveness'.
The
Ministry of Education and Research (MER) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs
and Communications (MEAC) share the overall responsibility for research and
innovation (R&I) policy in Estonia. Both are responsible for strategic
planning (including policy studies), implementing the policies in cooperation
with the intermediate bodies, as well as supervising and evaluating the policy
implementation. But, while MER is responsible for research and education
policies, financing and evaluating research institutes and coordinating
international cooperation in research, MEAC supervises support for and funding
of industrial research and development (R&D), as well as planning,
coordinating and implementing the innovation policy. Two permanent advisory
bodies (the Research Policy Committee and the Research Competence Council)
provide advice to MER, while the Innovation Policy Commission advises MEAC. In
addition, the Research and Development Council (R&D Council) is an expert
consultative body that advises the Government on R&D and innovation
matters. All policy documents on the way for approval by the Government have to
pass through this R&D Council.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Estonia represented EUR 110 per inhabitant
in 2012 (EUR 179.2 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 122.7. In
2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 2.12 % of total government expenditures and
0.84 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period after the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of
total GBAORD in Estonia was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD.
In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Estonia, measured
as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In
comparison, in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD, measured as a percentage
of public government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a
share of GDP has evolved positively in Estonia even when it regressed at EU-28
level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Concerning
project-based funding, there are no official figures for Estonia. The main
RD&I funders are MER and MEAC. Other ministries only count for less than 5
% of State funding. MER is mainly responsible for the funding of basic and
applied research while MEAC is rather in charge of the funding of technology
development and innovation. In 2012, the share of competitive versus
institutional funding in the R&D national budget of MER was respectively 70
% (targeted financing and institutional research funding and European Training
Foundation (ETF) grants and personal research funding) and 30 % (baseline
funding and support to the maintenance of R&D infrastructures). Most of the
funding from the MEAC budget is also competitive.
New
(2012) competitive funding instruments are institutional research funding (EUR
22.97 million; 53 % of state budget) and personal research funding (EUR 7.22
million; 17 %). This means that, since 2013, only baseline funding (17 % of
funding allocated directly to research institutions) was not based on
competition, while support from European Union Structural Funds, being of
temporary character, was not considered as a direct funding. Relevant
amendments were introduced in the Organisation of Research and Development Act
in 2012. The implementation of the institutional research funding has however
been challenging and still needs some adjustment. The MEAC funding instruments
include a very high share from EU Structural funds. In 2011 and 2012, 64 % of
all public sectors RDI funding was financed by Structural Funds, so the main
regulation, which sets the rules is the 2007-2013 Structural Assistance Act and
related acts and procedures, designed for special measures and funds. R&D
national budget is channelled through four funding agencies. MER governs three
of them: Archimedes Foundation, the Estonian Research Council (substituting the
Estonian Science Foundation in March 2012) and the Innove Foundation, while
MEAC governs the Enterprise Estonia Foundation. MEAC exerts also tutorship on
Foundation KredEx, which offers financial services (loans, venture capital, credit
insurance and guarantees with state guarantee) aimed at helping enterprises to
develop quicker.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
Allocated
funds are mostly competitive and the evaluation on projects follows the
international peer review core principles.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
part of public RDI funding from the state budget is rather limited in Estonia.
In 2012, there were two main ‘block funding’: ‘baseline funding’ (EUR 7.16
million; 16 % of state budget) and ‘support to the maintenance of R&D
infrastructures’ (EUR 6.07 million; 14 %). Criteria for allocating block funds
for RDI institutions are set in the Organisation of Research and Development
Act (introduced in 1997, last update in 2012).
Introduced
in 2005, annual baseline funding is allocated to R&D institutions if they
have received a regular positive evaluation using the following methodology:
first 5 % is allocated to humanitarian research of national significance; the
remaining 95 % is distributed according to the performance; 50 % in proportion
with the number of high level publications in internationally-recognised
journals, the number of high level research monographs and the number of
registered patents and patent applications; 40 % in proportion with the amount
of financing of R&D from other sources i.e. targeted research, commissioned
by enterprises, municipalities, ministries, etc. and 10 % in proportion with
the number of doctoral graduates. Infrastructure expenses and institutional
research funding are allocated to institutions whose R&D activities have
received a regular positive evaluation in at least one field, as a threshold
criteria giving right to present an application.
Annual
baseline funding is allocated for strategic goals, co-financing foreign and
domestic projects, opening up new research directions, etc. Since 2013,
'Support to maintenance of R&D infrastructures' has been included to
institutional funding, entirely in the form of overhead expenses.
A
regular evaluation of Estonian public organisations is carried out every 7
years by international experts. A threshold has been set to get access to the
main research budgetary instruments. The evaluation is based on patents,
publications, PhDs, etc. This applies to all institutions: universities, public
research organisations and private organisations receiving institutional
funding.
The
Estonian Research Council manages the funding flows of the Ministry of
Education and Research, such as institutional research funding for high-level
R&D and related activities and personal and post-doctoral research funding
for research activities of individuals or research groups. The Estonian
Research Council is also responsible for national activities concerning the
European Research Area (ERA), notably EURAXESS Services and serves as National
Contact Point for Horizon 2020 and COST. Also governed by the Ministry of
Education and Research, Archimedes Foundation is the implementing Agency of
Structural Support for the periods 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 in the field of
R&D. Enterprise Estonia Foundation and Foundation KredEx are operating
under the premises of Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication and
provide support for innovation and technology programmes, for instance. The
target groups of these foundations are mostly enterprises, but also public
research performers are addressed in case of enterprise collaboration.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 5.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. Estonia launched the
programme for the internationalisation of science in 2011 (EUR 10.4 million)
with the aim to support joint activities such as sharing information, joint
research agenda, joint calls, joint programming and also developing ex post
evaluation procedures. Most joint-financing actions are regulated by the
2007-2013 Structural Assistance Act and by the Organisation of Research and
Development Act. Joint financing is welcome and project partners are selected
by excellence, not by country of origin. Universities and other R&D
institutions are independent and can choose their partners from any country in
the world.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Estonia allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Estonia
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between the Institutions of Member States (MS), the Associated Countries and
the third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh
Framework Programme (FP7), Estonia’s share for contribution in total participation
is 0.4 % and the country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding
represents EUR 61 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period
2007-2013 and 6.7 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for
the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3.7 % of GERD for the
same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, Estonia is participating in two of the 10
ongoing initiatives: Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change and Cultural
Heritage and Global change: a new challenge for Europe. Additional preparations
for participation in several other initiatives are in progress.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called article 185
initiatives), Estonia was involved in three programmes: EMRP, Eurostars and
BONUS. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four
existing initiatives: EMPIR and Eurostars2.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 29 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in six ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which 4 are still running, in areas with high European added value
and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
International
cooperation projects are funded by the Estonian Research Council in the
framework of either bilateral (the PARROT programme with France, memoranda with
the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Foundation and the US Civilian Research and
Development Foundation) or pan-European initiatives (EUROCORES, ERA-NET,
ARTEMIS, EMBO). There are agreements in place with Baltic and Nordic partners
and several exchange programmes such as the Norwegian-Estonian Research
Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 and the Nordplus Programme of eight
participating countries in the Baltic and Nordic regions.
Estonia
has also concluded bilateral agreements in the field of education and research
with the following EU and associated countries: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the
Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy,
Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, United Kingdom and Turkey. Trilateral
agreements between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have been signed for the
exchange of students, scientists and teachers (in force from 2012 to 2016) as
well as a mutual understanding memorandum for cooperation in higher education,
science and innovation (in force from 2013 to 2020).
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. However, Estonia has the following
bilateral agreements with third countries: 
-
With the United States: a general agreement on scientific and technological
cooperation; specific agreements on cooperation in the fields of information
technology and materials science and energy;
-
With Russia in the field of humanities;
-
With India in the field of biotechnology;
-
With China in the fields of social sciences, physics condensed matter, genetic
heredity, optics.
There
are also bilateral agreements with Taiwan, Israel, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Estonia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures
supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is equal to 0.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer-review
standards is not supported. 
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of
Joint Programmes are not applied by the funding agencies in the country. In
fact, Estonia has no directly relevant national legislation. Joint financing is
welcome and project partners are selected by excellence, not by country of
origin. Universities and other Research and Development institutions are
independent and can choose their partners from any country in the world. Since
2002, world level research and cooperation is also promoted through the Centres
of Excellence Programme.
Funding
agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme that enables
small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils
to be conducted in a different country. Although The Estonian Research Council
has adhered to the Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables researchers
to move to a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going
grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according
to original terms and objectives, it has not yet been implemented since there
have not been any relevant applications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 46.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
Research
funders in Estonia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Estonia
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RIs): European Space Agency (ESA) and European Fusion Development Agreement
(EFDA). The country contributes 0.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out
by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), (Eurostat).
In
terms of financial commitments to develop of these RIs included in the European
Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Estonia is
committed to fund six of them: CLARIN, ESS Survey, BBMRI, EATRIS, ELIXIR and
the European Spallation Source.
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Estonia is involved in four of the nine consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate establishing and operating
RIs of European interest involving several European countries: CLARIN-ERIC,
EATRIS ERIC, ESS ERIC and BBMRI-ERIC.
In
terms of support to develop and implement RIs, Estonia relies on its Research
Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 (update planned for 2014), which is a long-term
(10-20 years perspective) planning instrument. This roadmap lists RI units of
national importance, which are either new or need modernising. It includes
references to Estonia's participation in developing the RIs mentioned in the
ESFRI roadmap. The budget for each component is provided in the investment plan
for the sub-measure 'Modernising research infrastructure of national
importance'. A number of RI investments supporting participation in
international research infrastructures have been made from the Programme for
the Internationalisation of Science.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Regarding
access to its RIs, Estonia has no national legislation that is directly
applicable. The Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 itemises
national interest in specific ESFRI projects, but does not deal with rules on
access to facilities. In 2014, Estonia has created a funding instrument to
support open access to national core facilities.
There
are no large scale RI facilities with pan-European interest in Estonia and,
therefore foreign researchers and R&D institution interests in using
Estonian Research Infrastructures have not been great. For several years,
Estonia has used the European Structural Funds for the development of Estonian
R&D infrastructure. As a consequence of the substantial impact of this
funding, quality improves every year. Thus, from the R&D infrastructure
development investment plan, two facilities out of nine have been finalised,
and from the Programme for the Internationalisation of Science, the development
of three RIs were supported and there is the possibility of participating in
several others.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Estonia in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Estonia_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 4 511 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Estonia in 2011. This
represents 6.5 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 7.6 among the Innovation
Union reference group (Innovation followers) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 51.1 in Estonia
compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 63 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
trend is to publish more on online platforms. According to the Organisation of
Research and Development Act, §9 and University Act, §34, all regular teaching
and research positions in R&D institutions have to be filled by public
competition.
The
selection criteria are published in the employment regulation rules of the
universities, and are available on their websites. These rules are then
referred to in the advert.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
In
September 2011, the Rectors’ Conference, representing all universities in
Estonia, signed an 'Agreement on Good Practice Regarding Quality'. Point 10 of
the Agreement refers to the implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’.
In
addition, in 2011, the Rectors’ Conference participated in the second cohort of
the European Commission Institutional Human Resources Strategy Group. The
Estonian Research Council (previously Estonian Science Foundation) participates
in the third cohort and four more R&D institutions are in the fourth
cohort. The Estonian Research Council is conducting a national gap analysis
which was under way in early 2014.
By
May 2014, five Estonian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers.
In
Estonia, funding has shifted from core to project-based funding. Therefore, the
funding is oriented towards supporting high-level R&D to guarantee the
consistency and sustainability of a research field in Estonia. The largest
funding instruments are the institutional research funding and personal
research funding. Institutional research funding enables R&D institutions
to fund high-level R&D activities and to modernise and maintain the
necessary infrastructure. Personal research funding is allocated for research
activities of individuals or research groups. Both instruments are
competition-based.
Doctoral
candidates have access to health insurance, but are not eligible for sickness
and unemployment benefits or pensions, unless they are hired by the university
under an employment contract. In that case, they benefit from full social
security coverage. Since 2012, the state has encouraged and supported
universities in hiring doctoral students as early-stage researchers despite the
fact that most of the doctoral candidates are already working, not necessarily
as researchers, and receive full social security coverage as employees.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34
was 1.3 in 2011 compared to 1.6    among the Innovation Union reference group
and an EU average of 1.7.
The
Estonian Government focuses on enhancing of the quality and efficiency of
doctoral studies by organising doctoral schools, mobility opportunities for
both incoming and outgoing researchers, and developing of entrepreneurship (by
introducing economic courses and modules for non-business students in all three
university circles).
Doctoral
schools were set up in 2005. In 2009, 13 new doctoral schools were selected for
the period 2009-15. Their aim is to improve the quality of doctoral candidate
tutoring and to increase the efficiency of doctoral studies in Estonia through
interdisciplinary, international and national cooperation. Apart from mobility
opportunities, winter and summer schools and study programmes, doctoral schools
propose transferable and social skills training to promote interdisciplinary
research and enhance cooperation between universities and the private sector. 
From
2010, students who have interrupted their doctoral studies are welcome to
continue and finish their studies (i.e. they are given a second chance). Those
resuming doctoral studies may participate in doctoral schools. These help them
find supervisors and participate in summer schools, conferences and mobility
activities provided by doctoral schools. At least two partners need to be
involved. They can be an Estonian university, an R&D institution, the
public sector or companies. Doctoral schools are project-based and are funded
by the European Social Fund. 
The
measures introduced by the Estonian Government in support of doctoral training
during the 2013-2017 programming period covers activities up to 2015. New
initiatives under the new R&D&I strategy are in the development phase,
but doctoral studies will definitely be a key priority in research human
resource policies.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
MS was 5.6 % in Estonia compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference
group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates
as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 4.2 % in Estonia compared to
16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.
The
DoRa Doctoral Studies and Internationalisation Programme (2008-15) targets
Master and doctoral students and academic staff who are already working or
studying at Estonian higher education institutions or are planning to do so: 
-           Activity
2: Encouraging short-term visits for outgoing Estonian teaching staff for 1-6
months (eligible expenditures include a salary, travel expenses and a
relocation allowance);
-           Activity
6: Developing international cooperation networks by supporting the mobility of
Estonian doctoral students for 1-5 months (eligible expenses are living
allowance, a travel grant);
-           Activity
7: Strengthening the international dimension in higher education by supporting
the mobility of Master’s students for 1-6 months (eligible expenses are a
living allowance and a travel grant);
Activity
8: Supporting the participation of young researchers in the international
exchange of knowledge for 3-21 days (eligible expenses are the participation
fee, travel expenses, living allowance, etc.)
 The
SPINNO Programme (2007-2013) was launched by MEAC to promote cooperation
between R&D institutions and enterprises. It also supports knowledge- and
technology transfer in Estonian research institutions. The programme is
co-financed by the European Union Structural Funds through Enterprise Estonia .
The total budget was EUR 7.7 million.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Gender
equality in public research in Estonia falls under the Gender Equality Act
(adopted in 2004, latest amendments in 2013), which promotes policies
addressing gender balance and encourages the State, local governments,
agencies, educational and research institutions, and private companies to
support gender equality. However, the Estonian Government has not introduced
specific gender quotas in support of gender equality either in the public or in
the private sector. Excellence remains the main criterion for researchers to
receive funding and to participate in decision-making bodies. Gender equality
in the research sector is not a sensitive issue in Estonia because of gender
balance which is already satisfactory: there is almost the same number of women
(49 %) and men (51 %) among researchers and engineers. However, in the Estonian
Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2014-2020 'Knowledge-based
Estonia', the one goal is to pay more attention to guarantee equal
opportunities in terms of gender, including positions, grant decisions and steering
committees.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Estonia did not indicate any existing support to national policies
on gender equality in public research.
Even
though a proactive gender equality research policy is missing in Estonia,
female researchers are paid by the State during maternity leave. Since 2007,
fathers have had the right to receive a 'parental benefit' once the child is
seventy days old. However, if a researcher is part of a project team and the
project ends during the parental leave, it is up to the host institution to
find an available research position in which to employ the researcher.
Additionally, there are some opportunities in financing system that support
equal possibilities for women to apply for a grant. When awarding grants,
periods when a person is on parental leave are taken into account when
analysing the eligibility criteria as part of the  total number of years after
obtaining a PhD degree. For men, the time spent under military duty is also
taken into consideration. There are also special measures for post-doctorate
grants of ERMOS and Mobilitas, when the State is ready to support the holder of
the grant also after the nominal time is ended, if the grant actions are not
fulfilled or stopped for certain reasons like having a child.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 11.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
In
terms of funding of initiatives on gender equality, the programme 'Advancing
Gender Equality 2011-2013' was introduced and is still ongoing.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 75.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Regarding
gender balance in public research decision making, the Estonian Government has
not introduced any specific gender quotas.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 27.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 15 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Estonia is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the legal basis ensuring open access and
preservation of scientific information is set up in the Organisation of
Research and Development Act under conditions for institutional and personal
research funding (relevant amendments to the act in force since 2012), which
state free access to the results of publicly-funded research. In the framework
of the main research funding instruments, the conditions/requirements for open
access are therefore set up and the open access policy is in place. It requires
researchers to publish in open access; both the green and gold open access
models are supported.
According
to the regulations on institutional research funding (Estonian Ministry of
Education and Research) and personal research funding (Estonian Research
Council), any publication arising from supported research project or research
grant is required to be deposited into the Estonian Research Information System
(ETIS). The researchers are responsible for providing the publication metadata
(i.e. journal name, title, author list, volume, issue, page numbers etc.) and
an appropriate copy of the publication immediately. Self-archiving of the full
texts of publications is mandatory but access can be restricted for internal
use until the end of the publisher’s embargo. Impact factors of journals are
not taken into account when evaluating research output of research institutions
or individual researchers. The open access policy has therefore no direct
impact on the researcher's career. Through the number of citations and
H-factors, the impact of publications is however indirectly taken into account
when evaluating applications.
Related
to publications, access to scientific information is not a problem for Estonian
scientists as the Consortium of Estonian Libraries Network (established in
1996, statute renewed in 2011) and the research libraries have created very
good conditions and access to scientific journals and electronic databases for
national researchers, which is probably why Estonian researchers do not feel
the need for specific open access policies. In addition, the current research
funding conditions favour publishing in journals with a high impact, but they
are not usually open access journals.
The
length of embargo depends on publisher and publication channels, and is
currently not set by the funder. The academic freedom to choose appropriate
publication channels is acknowledged, so there is no pressure to publish in so
called Gold Open Access journals.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 96.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 20.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, there is no specific policy, except for the Programme of
Electronic Scientific Information (launched in 2009), which aims to supply the
Estonian R&D institutions with scientific information and to acquire access
to the scientific information and electronic publications for the Estonian
research libraries and organisations. The programme period is 2010-2014. There
are some plans to take into account open access to data, but it is not yet
included as a criterion in the funding decisions and evaluations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 43.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
The
Estonian e-repository programme (launched in 2011) is an integrated
e-environment created for long-term preservation and availability of digitised
resources of the Estonian cultural heritage institutions: libraries, archives
and museums. The e-repository enables to link national heritage collections
with the pan-European library EUROPEANA. 
The
Estonian Research Information System (ETIS; established in 2006) is developed
in a way that would allow it to be used as an open repository, so that the
results of research receiving public funding are easily identifiable by
appropriate technical means, including through meta-data attached to electronic
versions of the research output.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Estonia has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. The RDI Strategy
2007-2013 'Knowledge-Based Estonia' and Estonian Strategy for Competitiveness
'Estonia 2020' (launched in 2010) has given the framework for fostering open
circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. With the
support of the Enterprise Estonia Foundation, specific attention has been paid
creating technology transfer capacity in universities. 
Technology
transfer is encouraged including the patenting of information into the
evaluation and funding of the universities. The basic funding of research
institutions is therefore based on performance indicators, also taking into
account indicators for knowledge transfer, patent applications, patents and
contract research.
A
number of measures to facilitate the partnerships and productive interactions
between research institutions and the private sector have been implemented
since 2008-2009. Counselling on measures is also provided in county development
centres. The following measures are funded by MEAC and implemented by the
Enterprise Estonia Foundation:
-           Cluster
development programme;
-           Knowledge
and technology transfer baseline funding (SPINNO Programme);
-           Programme
'Start-up Estonia' for new innovative enterprises.
For
the next programming period, two strategies have been prepared in parallel, to
ensure a coherent R&D policy. In October 2013, the new Entrepreneurship
Growth Strategy 2014-2020 was launched, and in January 2014, the new RDI
strategy for 2014-2020. Both focus even more on the co-operation between
enterprises and R&D institutions.
Through
technology transfer capacities in universities and county development centres,
funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer
activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the
strategy.
Strategic
partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are not supported by funding organisations in
Estonia.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 83 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of the Digital European Research Area (ERA),
Estonia has not set up any strategy. However, on 1 May 2013, the Tiger Leap
Foundation, the Estonian Education and Research Network and the Estonian
Information Technology Foundation merged with the 'Estonian Information
Technology Foundation for Education' (HITSA). The mission of HITSA is to
provide a high-quality national network infrastructure for Estonia’s research,
educational and cultural communities. Its services include a permanent Internet
connection, as well as webhosting, an e-mail, consultations in the event of
security problems, etc.
In
addition, the 'Estonian higher education information and communications
technology and R&D activities State programme 2011-2015' is a cooperation
programme implemented by HITSA, between universities, the information and
communication technology (ICT) sector and the State aimed at raising the
quality of ICT and developing cooperation between different partners.
Concerning
digital services, Estonia provides Cloud services and Premium services
(Consultancy, NREN service implementation support, and others). Access to
digital research services is possible via 'E-teadusinfo' (launched in 2009) and
access to publications is possible in all public libraries by using usernames
and passwords. EENet is the Estonian National Research and Education Network, a
specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of
research and education communities within the country.
From
a more general point of view, e-identity systems are very well developed in
Estonia; identification is ensured through the ID card and it is quite widely
applied.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
EENet
is the Estonian National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet
service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and
education communities within the country. Since 2013, EENet has become part of
the HITSA. Functioning via EENet, the Estonian Academic Authentication and
Authorization Infrastructure (TAAT) enables electronic identities (user
accounts) issued by education or research institutions to be used to access
several web-based services. In June 2013, the policy document of eduGAIN, a
service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to
identity, authentication and authorisation between the GEANT (GN3plus) Partner
federations, was signed by EENet on behalf of TAAT and Estonia became a partner
of eduGAIN.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 16 research performing organisations in Estonia answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 60.3% of the total number of researchers in the country
(total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Estonia shows that 20.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 66.7 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 13.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 88.1 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 10.0 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.9 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Reform of national funding schemes || 2012 || X ||   
 Conditions and Procedure for Evaluation of Research and Development Institutions || 2009 ||   ||   
 The Research and Development Organisation Act - amended in 1997, 2009 and 2012 || 1995 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Conditions and procedure for applying for, awarding and amending the amount of institutional research funding || 2011 ||   ||   
 Quality Agreement of Estonian Universities || 2011 ||   ||   
 Personal Research Funding || 2012 || X ||   
 Improving the competitiveness of Estonian R&D through the research programmes and modernisation of higher education and R&D institutions || 2007 ||   ||   
 New RDI Strategy (“Knowledge-based Estonia”) for 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Organisation of Research and Development Act (last amendment in 2012) || 1997 ||   ||   
 Research and Innovation Policy Monitoring Programme 2011-2015 (TIPS Programme) ||   ||   ||   
 Information Technology Foundation for Education || 2013 || X || X 
 Organisation of Research and Development Act - amendment 1997 and 2009 || 1995 ||   ||   
 Detailed conditions and procedure for applying for, conducting and approving the result of regular evaluation of research and development || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 The Programme for the Internationalisation of Science || 2011 ||   ||   
 Implementation Plan for achieving the objectives of Estonian Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2007-2013 “Knowledge-based Estonia” in 2012-2013 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Swiss-Estonian Research Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 || 2009 ||   ||   
 Nordplus Programme || 2012 || X ||   
 Centres of Excellence Programme || 2012 || X ||   
 Norwegian-Estonian Research Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 || 2009 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 (to be updated in 2014) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Universities Act || 2012 || X ||   
 Programme for Cooperation and Innovation between Higher Education Establishments || 2012 || X ||   
 Programme Mobilitas || 2008 ||   ||   
 The conditions of and procedure for the election of academic research professors || 2002 ||   ||   
 Agreement on Good Practice in the Internationalisation of Estonia’s Higher Education Institutions || 2007 ||   ||   
 Programme ERMOS || 2010 ||   ||   
 Aliens Act (amended 2013) || 1996 ||   ||   
 EURAXESS Service Centres - Agreement of good practice ||   ||   ||   
 Standard of Higher Education (amendment in 2012) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Gender Equality Act  - amended in 2012 || 2004 ||   ||   
 Programme “Advancing Gender Equality" || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Organisation of Research and Development Act || 2012 || X ||   
 Estonian e-repository programme || 2011 ||   ||   
 Principles for the preparation of a uniform collection plan for research libraries and the procedure for application for financing the acquisition of research information for research libraries, for the review of applications and for making financing || 2012 || X ||   
 The Programme of Electronic Scientific Information || 2009 ||   ||   
 Innovation voucher grant  || 2009 ||   ||   
 Estonian Research Information System || 2006 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Programme "Start-up Eesti" || 2011 ||   ||   
 Knowledge and technology transfer baseline funding (SPINNO Programme)   || 2008 ||   ||   
 Cluster development || 2009 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Consortium of Estonian Libraries Network (statute renewed in 2011) || 1996 ||   ||   
 State Program 2011-2015 on higher education information and communication technology and research and development activities || 2011 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 E-teadusinfo || 2009 ||   ||   
 eduGAIN (Membership) || 2013 || X || X 
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of the General
Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT), a policy design and
implementation agency, and the National Council of Research and Technology
(NCRT).
The
Ministry of Education, Life Long Learning and Religious Affairs is the main
R&D policy body. Within the Ministry, the design and implementation of the
research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policy is carried out by
the GSRT that is also responsible for supporting, supervising and financing the
research activities of research institutes and of its productive industry, of
representing the country within the European Union, promoting cooperation in
the areas of research and technology, and monitoring the national research
institutions. The GSRT is also the main research funding organisation in
Greece.
NCRT
is the supreme State body for formulating and implementing the national policy
for research, technology and innovation. NCRT proposes main R&D guidelines
in the area of research and technology, assesses candidacies for directorship
appointments in national research organisations, gives opinions to the Ministry
of Education and Religious Affairs on the selection of directors in national
research organisations, as well as on issues raised by the Ministry of
Education and Religious Affairs.
An
Innovation Council was created in December 2013.
The
NDC is the national organisation for the documentation, information and support
in the areas of research, science and technology. Notably, the centre is
responsible for creating and  disseminating Greek scientific databases online,
structuring and disseminating the National Archive of PhD theses, developing
and providing software for the electronic operation of national libraries and
their web links with Greek and international scientific databases and creating
a Library Network.
The
R&I policy is planned for a period of seven years following the cycle of
the European Structural Funds. Universities are key players followed by
research centres, and the business sector plays a limited role. 
Greece’s
research and technology system is centralised and dominated by the public
sector in terms of funding and performance.
The
responsibility of funding research is divided between the Ministry of Education
and Religious Affairs and the Ministry of Development and Competitiveness, the
latter having the overall responsibility for supporting regional development in
general, including entrepreneurship and partly (recently) innovation. The
Ministry of Development and Competitiveness is currently managing the National
Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF), which is the main funding source for
R&I. Funds coming from the Regional Operational Programmes is typically
under the responsibility of the Regional Councils. 
Frequent
changes in research, development and innovation (RDI) legislation indicates a
weak governance. Yet another RDI law is about to be released following a public
consultation in December 2013, aimed at addressing existing weaknesses. The law
defines the bodies that will be responsible for designing the new RTDI strategy
and establishing a new department within the Ministry of Education and
Religious Affairs for designing and monitoring actions related to the national
RTDI strategy and its implementation and coordination. Also, a new simplified
administrative management system is foreseen in the period 2014-2020.
In
2007, the country adopted a national strategy for R&I, following the
Structural Fund programming cycle 2007-2013. It is described in the ‘Strategic
Development Plan for Research, Technology and Innovation’ (SDP) and the
operational programme (OP) ‘Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship’. Further to a
consultation process in 2012 the GSRT and the National Council are elaborating
the new National Strategic Framework for Research, Technological Development
and Innovation that would run up to 2020.
The
GSRT is developing a new National Strategy for Research and Innovation, that
will build on the competitive advantage of Greece in certain research areas at
European and international level and will try to maximise its potential,
through R&D investment on strategic, national priority areas, and will
foster innovation and entrepreneurship.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Greece represented EUR 66 per inhabitant
in 2012, less than half the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per
inhabitant declined slightly (EUR 64). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to
0.7 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 % of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)(Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period after the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of
total GBAORD in Greece is higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In
terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Greece, measured as a
percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively, but less
negatively than the evolution observed at EU-27 level. Finally, GBAORD as a
share of GDP has regressed more in Greece than the regression observed in the
EU-28. 
Most
of the government funding in 2012 was directed to the higher education sector
(EUR 377.3 million) and to public research organisations (EUR 257.3 million).
Funding from the BES (Business Enterprise Sector) was at EUR 414.8 million at
the end of 2012, compared to EUR 455.5 million at the end of 2011 (8.9 %
decrease). In the same period, funding from higher education institutions
(HEIs) decreased by 17 %.
A
significant feature of the Greek national R&D system is the high share of
funding from abroad amounting to about 16% of GERD (2012). This funding comes
from the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and Structural Funds,
the former contributing slightly more than the latter. 
The
main bulk in research takes place within the higher education sector.
There
has been a systematic increase of competitive funding compared to block funding.
All competitive research programmes are supported by the EU Structural Funds.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
GSRT manages the project-based funding. One of its units, namely the 'Special Service
for Coordination and Implementation of R&D and Innovation measures', issues
the calls for proposals and evaluates them.
Law
3777/2009 (art.18), amending Presidential Decree 274/2000 on 'Terms, conditions
and process of funding (subsidy or aid) of projects and programmes submitted by
industrial or other production units' set the principles for competitive
funding.
Competitive
funding in the programming period 2007-2013 was channelled by the NSRF, which
is co-financed by the Structural Funds. The two concrete instruments for
project funding are the following: 
•           Research
programmes: Heraclitus II funding PhDs (total budget EUR 39.6 million); Thales
funding research networks (total budget EUR 120 million); Archimedes III
focusing on TEIs (total budget EUR 21 million), post-doctorate research (EUR 30
million) and research projects implemented by a primary investigator (EUR 60
million); Collaboration supports collaborative research by private companies
and public research organisations (EUR 229 million); ‘Support for R&D in
groups of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’ finance research projects
implemented by groups of SMEs collaborated with public research organisations,
technology transfer organisations and technology suppliers (EUR 23.7 million); ‘Support
for R&D in new firms’ finance small to medium research projects implemented
by new companies with subcontracting to public research organisations  (EUR
11.3 million).
•           Research
networks: includes the support of the existing Innovation Poles and the
creation of new ones, the Innovation Zone in Thessaloniki and the research
funding within the Microelectronics Cluster ‘Corallia’ (EUR 33 million).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 75.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are applied by all research
funding institutions in Greece. These principles are excellence, impartiality,
transparency, appropriateness for purpose, efficiency and speed. 
Research
proposals and the assessment of the research programs are evaluated using the
peer review system by the GSRT. The evaluators are scientists selected either
from an official registry or the ‘Web of Science’. All non-block funding is
distributed via calls for proposals from the GSRT and all these calls are
competitive and evaluated by national and international experts. The
beneficiaries are selected on the basis of the ranking after the evaluation. 
The
new research, development and innovation (RD&I) law proposes new evaluation
methods for research organisations.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding for Higher Education Institutions is not systematically allocated based
on an institutional assessment. It is mostly based on an algorithm that takes
into consideration quantitative aspects, such as the number of HEIs and
Research Organisations (Ros) students. There are no laws or soft law measures
requiring that institutional funding is allocated on a competitive basis. There
is also no information available regarding the percentage of institutional
funding allocated on a competitive basis.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Greece who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of
institutional funding .
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Common
research agendas are mainly driven by EU-supported schemes. Greek research
teams participate extensively in several EU initiatives and often play an
important role in research agendas for grand challenges. Policy actions
supporting joint activities are implemented in the context of INCOERAnets.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Greece allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Greece
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third
countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Greece in total participation is
3.2 % and the country received 2.5 % of total EC contribution. FP funding
represents EUR 83 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period
2007-2013.
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in five of the 10
on-going initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer), Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe,
Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Water Challenges
for a Changing world, and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the
country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives:  EMPIR,
Eurostars2. In addition, Greece would like to join AAL2.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 54 ERA-NETs, of which 20 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in two ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which one is still running, in areas with high European added value
and additional EU financial support topping up their joint calls for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Greece has
bilateral agreements, notably with France, Israel, Germany, Turkey and Cyprus.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Greece has
bilateral agreements with China and Israel.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Greece
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Greece
has policies in place to facilitate the cross-border interoperability of
national programmes. Foreign natural and legal persons are eligible to perform
projects, carry out studies and implement programs and actions to promote
research, technological development and innovation in Greece. The funding
conditions and procedures are defined on an ad-hoc basis by a Presidential
Decree prepared with the help of the GSRT.
A
mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review
standards is supported in Greece by Law 3653/2008, notably  in ERANETsplus,
EUREKA and other activities coordinated by the EC. There are provisions to
ensure the mutual recognition of evaluation results in all the bilateral
agreements that Greece has with MS and Associated Countries.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 98.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Greece allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
EL
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RIs): Europeean Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche
Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), and European
Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). In 2012, the country contributed 2.2 % of
GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, the European Southern
Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the
Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research
Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of RIs included in the European
Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country
participates in the preparatory phase of 25 of them. 
In
terms of financial commitments to developing these RIs, Greece is committed to
fund 14 of them. They are: CESSDA, CLARIN, DARIAH,  SHARE-ERIC, EMSO, EURO
ARGO, LIFEWATCH, HIPER, BBMRI, EATRIS, INFRAFRONTIER, ELI, KM3NeT, PRACE (ex
HPC).
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Greece is involved in four of the seven consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate establishing and operating
Ris of European interest involving several European countries. Greece is member
of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, EURO-ARGO ERIC and BBMRI-ERIC.
Greece
has a national strategy of RIs that addresses the need for upgrading the
existing infrastructures and identifying new ones.
In
2013, GSRT launched a call for creating a National Roadmap of Research
Infrastructures, that includes identifying RIs of national interest and ESFRI
projects. The process is expected to be concluded in 2014. Financial
commitments are expected to be formulated soon after.
The
annual budget allocated to Ris of pan-European interest is EUR 310.5 million,
whereas the allocation to ESFRI-related roadmaps is EUR 27.87 million (XFEL EUR
4 million; DARIAH, BBMRI and EATRIS EUR 5.7 million; CESSDA EUR 0.87 million;
EMSO EUR 3.7 million; EURO-ARGO EUR 0.8 million; INFRAFRONTIER EUR 3.9 million;
PRACE EUR 3.5 million; LIFEWATCH EUR 3.7 million; HIPER EUR 2 million and ELI
EUR 3.4 million).
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by Greece, access to 14 of them has
been funded by the European Commission.
Financial
support is provided for inward cross-border access to RI through the programme
'Career offer to Greek-speaking researchers from abroad' that gives grants to
foreigner Greek speakers, and through the programme for incorporating foreign
PhD researchers into the Greek RTD system. In addition, Law 2004/2011 enables
national researchers to take a sabbatical leave for up to three years to
participate in research projects abroad. An estimated 10 % of researchers make
use of this opportunity.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Greece in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Greece
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 24 674 FTE researchers in Greece in 2011. This represents 5.0 researchers
per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference
group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 80.7 in Greece
compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7
In
2012, 45 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
In
Greece, the major remaining barrier to the openness and transparency of the
recruitment system is the language. Until recently, higher education
institutions published job vacancies only in Greek and on their own websites
without making use of the EURAXESS Jobs portal. Language is an issue not just
because of publishing vacancies in English but also because in the
universities, knowledge of the Greek language is compulsory (in research
institutes it is not always the case). However, thanks to the efforts of
EURAXESS-GR, with the help of the General Secretariat for Research and
Technology, there has been a great improvement within the last two years
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
In
October 2010, the 65th Rectors’ Assembly unanimously adopted the ‘Charter &
Code’ encouraging all Greek higher education institutions to sign it and
recognise it as the tool to promote their human resource strategies. The Law
4009/2011 strongly promotes the ‘Charter and Code’ principles on excellence and
innovation. In practice, eight Universities (University of Crete, University of
Ioannina, University of Thessaly, University of Macedonia, University of
Patras, University of the Aegean, the International Hellenic University and the
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki), the Greek Rectors’ Conference, two
Research Centres (the National Hellenic Research Foundation and the Centre for
Research and Technology Hellas) as well as the Euroscience Association and the
Marie Curie Fellows Association have already signed and are currently
implementing the ‘Charter & Code’ principles.
By
May 2014, 9 organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources
Strategy for Researchers of which 2 had received the "HR Excellence in
Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
The
planned new Law for Research, Technology and Innovation develops mechanisms for
the career development of researchers, and especially, women.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.1 in
2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
Higher
education institutions have the possibility to increase the quality of doctoral
training trough collaboration with national and international higher education
and research institutions (Part IV of Law 4009/2011). Some PhD programmes
explicitly follow the ‘Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training’ while many
comply implicitly with some of the seven principles.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
Data
on the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of other countries is
not available.
In
November 2012, the Ministry for Education, Religious Affairs, Culture and
Sports launched a call for Higher Education Institutions in Greece for a pilot
programme for the mobility of young researchers of the Mediterranean Office for
Youth (MOY). The Programme aims to develop joint higher educational programmes,
with the participation of at least two higher education institutions from participating
countries, at a postgraduate or a doctorate level, and is expected to enhance
transnational mobility. Inward mobility remains limited, while the system is in
principle open. Both Greek and foreign researchers employed in higher education
institutions and research institutions abroad can apply for a researcher’s
position within a Greek institution. The Greek language constitutes a barrier
for inward mobility of researchers.
Under
Presidential Degree 274/2000 and Law 3777/2009, close collaboration between the
universities and the private sector is encouraged. Researchers from public
research centres can be recruited by private companies under specific
agreements decided by the Research Centre’s Administrative Board. Distinguished
scientists employed in the business or public sector can be called upon by
national research centres to conduct a specific research project or cooperate
on a partial employment basis. The Innovation Vouchers for SMEs scheme fosters
exchange of expertise and consultant services between ‘innovation agents’ (i.e.
universities, research centres) and companies. It targets SMEs active in the
manufacturing sector, software industry and research and development firms and
public laboratories of universities, technological colleges, research centres
and institutes, sectoral companies as suppliers of services of high added value
and knowledge intensity. In spite of these measures, better translation of the
scientific research strengths into marketable goods and services remains a key
policy challenge. Efforts are also needed to foster technology transfer and
address bureaucratic obstacles.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Greece
has specific gender provisions in the field of public research.
The
National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013, adopted in 2010, aims to
create a legal framework for providing equal opportunities to women in the
workplace and in life. The programme acknowledged amendments to legislation,
while specific project actions were undertaken by the General Secretariat of
Gender Equality and interventions in other Ministries and public authorities.
There are no explicit policies by funding agencies to foster cultural and
institutional change on gender .
In
2006, GSRT created the Periktioni network for women researchers and scientists
in Greece and the whole Mediterranean, Balkan and Black Sea region. 
The
National Documentation Centre (NDC), within the National Hellenic Research
Foundation (NHRF),  participates in GENDERA (Gender Debate in the European
Research Area) and SHEMERA (Euro-Mediterranean research cooperation on gender
and science) and has developed a database of good practice for equal
opportunities of genders in research (practices related to recruitment, selection
and promotion).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013, adopted in 2010, aims to
create a legal framework to provide equal opportunities to women in the
workplace and in life. The programme acknowledged amendments to legislation,
while specific project actions were undertaken by the General Secretariat of
Gender Equality and interventions in other Ministries and public authorities.
By
law, Greece supports women returning to the same position after parental leave.
However, female researchers are entitled to maternity leave only if they have
signed a contract with a research institution. 
Law
2839/2000 introduced provisions for a balanced participation of men and women
in the Public Sector, Public and Private Law entities, as well as in
municipalities. Law 3653/2008 addressed gender imbalances in the
decision-making process in the research sector for the recruitment from
National Bodies, Research and Technology Committees, provided that the
candidates have the same qualifications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
There
are no specific initiatives or funding to strengthen the gender dimension in
research programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Greece who responded to the survey indicated no specific
support to gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the country has set up quotas for the
under-represented sex to participate in decision-making bodies of Research
Performing Organisations. 
Gender
equality is encouraged in the research profession by guaranteeing female
representation in all top-level positions and decision-making bodies in a ratio
of at least one-third (based on Article 16 of the Greek Constitution and Law
3653/2008 Article 57). However, the number of women researchers, in particular
in senior positions, is limited.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 14 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 50 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Greece is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research
In
terms of support to open access, since 2013 the GSRT was appointed national
point for open access matters and has the mandate to elaborate a national
policy framework for open access to scientific publications and research data,
on the preservation and re-use of scientific information, and its
implementation and monitoring on related e-infrastructures. The institution set
up a working group to provide input to harmonise and implement open access in
Greece. Open access will be made mandatory for scientific publications
resulting from publicly funded research. Relevant changes to the legislative
framework of funding terms are in progress.
The
National Documentation Centre (NDC), within the NHRF, actively encourages open
access. Two Greek institutions have an explicit open access mandate (Panteion
University and Archimedes Centre for Modeling, Analysis and Computation at the
University of Crete). 
The
NDC project Mediterranean Open Access Network (ΜΕDOANET) is meant to
enhance existing strategies and structures for open access and contribute
towards implementing new ones in six Mediterranean countries, namely Greece,
Italy, France, Spain, Portugal and Turkey.
The
national research strategy of the new programming period, currently being
developed, will place emphasis on open access, especially in the context of
digital agenda.
Related
to open access to publications, the majority of open access papers in Greece in
the period 2008-2011 were green and hybrid (452 papers, almost 80 % of total
open access papers).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the current EC-funded project RECODE will provide policy
recommendations for open access to research data in Europe.
There
are 19 research data repositories.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded scientific
research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
With
respect to repositories, there are 27 open access repositories in Greece, in 10
Universities, two research organisations, the NDC and the Hellenic Managing
Authority of the Operational Programme 'Education and Lifelong Learning'.
Five
of the Greek open access repositories are OpenAIRE.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Greece has not developed a specific knowledge transfer strategy.
However, it fosters open circulation of knowledge between companies and
research organisations through various measures. 
The
Presidential Degree 274/2000 and Law 3777/2009 encourage collaboration between
universities and the private sector. Researchers from public research centres
can be recruited by private companies and vice versa. 
The
NDC/NHRF and the PRAXI-Network which is supervised by the Foundation for
Research and Technology Hellas (FORTH,  supervised by GSRT) supports the
development of research collaborations and exploitation of results between the
public and private sectors. 
Initiatives
to encourage the collaboration between industry and academia are performed
mainly through bilateral cooperation programmes. In the last years new
programmes have been established: the Hellenic Mobile Clusters Programme
(2007-2013), the Cooperation 2011 Programme, the Creation Programme
(2007-2013), Innovation Vouchers for SMEs (2009-2015), Collaboration (-2015),
and a scheme to support business with the employment of highly-qualified
scientific personnel under the Human Resources Development operational
programme (2007-2013).
In
2012, competitive calls were announced, focusing on developing human capital
for research in a knowledge economy (including support to excellent
researchers, researcher mobility towards enterprises and for training
innovation activities), with a total financing in excess of EUR 150 million for
the period 2011-2013. 
In
addition to direct support measures, developing an entrepreneurial and
innovation-friendly culture in the higher education sector will facilitate
collaboration. To this end, EUR 101 million were budgeted for developing
offices in universities and Technical Education Institutions that combine
career development counselling activities with promoting business planning
competitions, creating entrepreneurship clubs and developing courses on entrepreneurship.
The 2011 law for HEIs recognises these offices and gives them the status of
‘Innovation and Liaison Offices’, which are also responsible for Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 98.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is equal
to 0 .
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Greece has not set up a strategy for
its implementation, but the national research strategy of the new programming
period will place emphasis on open access, in the context of the digital
agenda. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential
to make digital services possible.
GRNet
is the Greek National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised
Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and
education communities within the country.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, and
collaboration support.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 50 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Greece
was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is a member of
eduGAIN through GRNet, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and autorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations. 
There
is no national policy on e-identity.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 40.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.
  NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 22 research performing organisations in Greece answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 15.3% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Greece shows that 30.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 60.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 10.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 46.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 53.2 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.2 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
One
major research performing organisation and some major research performing
organisations have not responded to the survey, which explains the low
percentages for some of the indicators.
For
the indicator 'Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading
researchers in research performing organisations', it should be noted that
major universities and research centers have not responded to the survey. 
For
the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst
research performing organisations', it should be noted that major research
performing organisations, that tend to publish a lot, did not respond to the
survey. 
For
the indicators 'Share of research performing organisations having or using a
structure for knowledge transfer activities' and 'Share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer
activities', it should be noted that the shares would have been higher if more
technical universities and research centers had answered to the survey. 
For
the indicator 'Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the
private sector', the share is 0% and this is in part due to the legal framework
in place.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 A legislative act  on the elaboration of the restructuring of the research system and creation of a flexible organization structure for research and technology organizations (ongoing) ||   ||   ||   
 New administrative management system on RDI for the new programming period 2014-2020 (in preparation) Structural Funds ||   ||   ||   
 Strategic Development Plan for Research, Technology and Innovation under the 2007-2013 National Strategic Reference Programme || 2007 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Presidential Decree 274/2000 on “Terms, conditions and process of funding (subsidy or aid) of projects and programs submitted by industrial or other production units”, as amended by Law 3777/2009, Article 18 “Amendment of Presidential Decree 274/2000” ( t || 2009 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 New bilateral R&D agreements (on-going) ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Roadmap of Research Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X 
 National strategy for research infrastructures (on-going) || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Support of Postdoctoral Researchers || 2010 ||   ||   
 New measures within the new programming period 2014-2020 ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess in Greece ||   ||   ||   
 Call for Request for Proposals for participation in the Pilot Programme for the mobility of young researchers of the Mediterranean Office for Youth (MOY) . || 2012 || X ||   
 Law 4009/2011 -Structure, operation, quality assurance of academic studies and internationalisation of HEIs || 2011 ||   ||   
 Specific Actions in the framework of the NSRF (2007-2013) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Presidential Degree 128/2008  Adaptation of Greek Legislation to Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of conducting scientific research. || 2008 ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 PD176/1997, Measures for the enhancement of security and health of pregnant women and new mothers  in the workplace, in accordance with 92/85/EC || 1997 ||   ||   
 Law 2839/2000, Provisions related to issues of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Public Administration and Decentralisation and other provisions || 2000 ||   ||   
 Law 3488/2006, Implementation of the principle of equal treatment of men and women in their access to employment, professional training and promotion, in employment terms and conditions and other related provisions || 2006 ||   ||   
 Law 3996/2011, Reform of the labor inspectorate, arrangements for social security and other provisions || 2011 ||   ||   
 National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Periktioni network for women researchers and scientists in Greece and the whole Mediterranean, Balkan and Black Sea region || 2006 ||   ||   
  Law 3653/2008 (article 57) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 National strategy for Research and Innovation in the new programming period 2014-2020 supports OA in the context of the digital agenda || 2014 || X || X 
 NDC hosted a workshop on National Policies for Open Access in the context of Mediterranean Open Access Network (MEDOANET) || 2012 || X ||   
 Greece signed the Alhambra Declaration for the enhancement of open access policies through the creation of national task force committees. || 2010 ||   ||   
 RECODE - Policy RECommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe   || 2013 || X || X 
 New measures to support research and innovation activities || 2014 || X || X 
 Operational Program for Research and Innovation in the new programming period 2014-2020 (Structural Funds) ||   ||   ||   
 National policy framework for open access to scientific publications and research data, on preservation and re-use of scientific information, and their implementation and monitoring on related e-infrastructures (on-going) || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Hellenic Mobile Cluster Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 PAVET 2013 in the framework of NSRF (2007-2013) || 2013 || X || X 
 Action “Supporting enterprises for recruiting high level scientific personnel” ||   ||   ||   
 New measures to support enterprises in the new programming period 2014-2020 || 2013 || X || X 
 Clusters Programme (Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship Operational Programme- 2007-2013) ||   ||   ||   
 COOPERATION 2011 – Partnerships between businesses and research bodies in specific research and technological sectors (on-going) ||   ||   ||   
 Innovation Vouchers for SMEs (2009-2015) || 2009 ||   ||   
 CREATION – Support to new innovative (notably highly knowledge-intensive) enterprises  (spin-offs and spin-outs) (2007-2013) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Greek Open Knowledge Foundation Network (OKFN) || 2013 || X || X 
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation (R&I) policies are mainly the responsibility of the Ministry
of Economics and Competitiveness (MINECO). The MINECO, assisted by the State
Secretary for Research, Development and Innovation (SSRDI), is responsible for
drafting and managing the main research, development and innovation (RDI)
instruments: the multiannual 'strategies' and 'plans'. MINECO allocated 76.7%
of the Spanish State Budget on RDI and innovation in 2013,  considerably
increasing its share (68.9% in 2012).
The
Executive Committee for Science, Technology and Innovation policy (CDCTI) is an
inter-ministerial body responsible for the planning, evaluating and
coordinating of the main Spanish instruments for RDI 'plans' and gathers all
Ministries with RDI responsibilities. 
Two
main consultative bodies support the design and implementation of the RDI strategies
and plans: the Council of Science, Technology and Innovation (CPCTI) in charge
of the coordination with regional governments and other actors in the research
and development (R&D) system; and the Advisory Council of Science,
technology and Innovation (CACTI) that represents the research community,
enterprises and trade-unions.
The
main funding bodies involved in the implementation of RDI policies are: the
Spanish Research Agency (to be created), which will be an autonomous entity
that will assign R&D funds on scientific merit grounds; and the Centre for
Industrial Technological Development (CDTI), which is a public corporate entity
mainly promoting innovation and technological development for companies. Other
institutions, such as the Carlos III Health Institute (ISCIII) also fund
research.
Other
institutions complete the R&D Spanish landscape: the Information system of
Science, Technology and Innovation (SICTI), responsible for the data collection
and analysis for the monitoring of all policy programmes and instruments of the
RDI policy; and the Committee of Ethics in Research, an advisory body on ethics
of research and technology.
The
Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), one of the most important research
performers of the country, with about the 15%of the national scientific
production from 2003 to 2011, has suffered large budget cuts from the
government.  
Spain
has a quasi-federal political system and its RDI-related policies are
decentralised to the regions. In the past, most regions developed similar
R&D plans and launched similar and often overlapping instruments,
programmes and agencies. Some recent developments, and in particular two new
institutions, aim to improve the coordination of national and regional RDI
policies: the above-mentioned Council of Science, Technology and Innovation
(CPCTI) and the Spanish Research Agency, both foreseen in the 2011 Law of
Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI).  
The
main RDI policy instruments are the Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology
and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) and the Spanish State Plan for Scientific
and Technical Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016). The strategies are
multiannual schemes that set the rationale, objectives and indicators. The plan
implements the strategies setting its priorities, programmes, coordination
mechanisms, costs and sources of funding.
The
implementation of the new policy framework is suffering from delays in
important policy R&D programmes (e.g. call for proposals of the R&D
plan on fundamental research projects 'Promotion of R&D and Innovation
towards societal challenges and Research Training (FPI)'), significant
reductions (e.g. Research Training – FPI and FPU – with a reduction of 200
grants) and cancellations.
Spain
adopted a national strategy for R&I in 2013 for 2013-2020. The strategy
sets the rationale, objectives and indicators of the Spanish R&D and
innovation policy.  The Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical
Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016) is a multiannual plan that implements
the EESTI by setting its priorities, programmes, coordination mechanisms, costs
and sources of funding.
The
most significant changes introduced by the strategy are an increased emphasis
on innovation, public-private R&D collaboration, research excellence and
other emerging topics, such as promoting RDI on societal challenges or the role
of public procurement  to promote R&D and innovation. The new strategy
provides sets of indicators to measure the impact of RDI policy.
The
strategy and the plan recognise the importance of increasing the role of
private investments in R&D, but they do not set a specific target of
Business Enterprise Research and Development (BERD)/Gross Domestic Expenditures
on R&D (GERD) or BERD/gross domestic product (GDP).
The
plan implementing the strategy gives special attention to the European Research
Area (ERA) and in particular to the promotion of: (a) excellent basic research;
(b) technological, industrial and firm leadership; and (c) scientific and
technical R&I capabilities on grand challenges.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Spain represented EUR 132 per inhabitant
in 2012, below the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded
to 1.3 % of total government expenditures and 0.6 % of GDP (Eurostat). 
In
2013 there was a reduction of  approximately EUR 460 million in the budget. The
budget for 2014 envisages an increase of EUR 213.9 million (3,61 %).
Important
public budget cuts have seriously affected national and regional budgets for
RDI and public R&D investments went back to the levels of 2005-2006. In the
last few years the share of loans has increased in contrast to that of
subsidies, which implies, de facto, an even greater decrease.
The
cuts indicate that it will be very difficult for Spain to reach the target of 3
% GERD per GDP set by the Europe 2020 strategy. Consequently, the new Spanish
Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) has set a
new lower target of 2 % GERD per GDP for 2020.
Four
regions accounted in 2012 for 69.7 % of all R&D expenditures: Madrid (25.6
%), Catalonia (22.3 %), Andalusia (11.1 %) and the Basque Country (10.7 %). In
relative terms, the leading regions are the Basque Country, Navarre, Madrid and
Catalonia with a GERD by GDP of 2.2 %; 1.9 %, 1.8 % and 1.5 % respectively. The
Basque Country is the only region that has increased its yearly R&D
Intensity over the last three years (2 %, 2.1 % and 2.2 %).
The
Spanish system of tax incentives (indirect government funding through three
types of R&D tax incentives for firms) for RDI has been one of the most
generous among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
countries for the past few years. However, the bureaucratic procedure for
benefitting from these deductions was until recently complex and uncertain.
The
percentage of Structural Funds devoted to RDI is increasing. The percentage of
these funds devoted to R&D rose from 14 % (EUR 3 810 million) in 2000–2006
to 31 % (EUR 6 641 million) in the period 2007–2013. The Spanish participation
in the EU Framework Programme (FP) is of around 8.3 % and Spain aims to
increase it to 9 %.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Competitive
project funding through public tenders gained importance in the last years. The
provisional budget for RDI distributed by the State Secretary of Research
Development and Innovation for 2013 was EUR 3 864.2 million, of which 72.3 %
was distributed through low interest credits and 27.7 % through subsidies
(MINECO, 2013).  The PECTI states that most of the funds will be distributed
through competitive funding mechanisms.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 64.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review to be applied in Spain according
to the PECTI are transparency, efficiency, and scientific quality. 
The
Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI) describes the core principles
of international peer review, but it does not impose the use of peer review.
Instead the LCTI states that the international standards of peer review are to
be followed where appropriate.
The
allocation of competitive funds usually follows the proposal peer-evaluation
process, usually carried out by domestic experts. International peer evaluation
is less frequent. The new strategy EESTI (2013-2020) includes international
evaluation of competitive funding as one of its five basic principles (number
three). In addition, one of its six articulation mechanisms (number 5)
considers the ‘harmonisation of criteria and practices of evaluation – ex ante
and ex post‘, including international peer review. The new PECTI (2013-2016),
as it implements the Strategy, also aims to increase the role of competitive
funding and ‘international peer review’.
The
evaluation is performed by specific organs, which may include international
evaluators, under the principles of independence, neutrality and
specialisation, basing the analysis on the available scientific and technical
knowledge.
The
Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT) carried out yearly
monitoring exercise of the R&D public calls for proposals from 2006-2012
and the CDTI evaluates most of the business-oriented instruments, and most
reports are publicly available on the FECYT website.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
assessment is seldom allocated based on institutional assessment and most
institutional funding is based on block funding. In addition, research
institutions have a low level of autonomy to allocate funds. 
Block
funding is provided to public research organisations and to universities.
Universities receive the salaries for the lectures that devote 66 % of their
time to research and this amount can be considered as institutional funding.
Public research organisations received in 2013 EUR 1 234.7 million (7.73 %
lower than 2012), which accounted for 19.6 % of GBOARD.
There
are some exceptions where institutional funds are allocated based on
performance, like for instance, funding programmes concerning the procurement
and grants for researchers. In addition, the University Strategy 2015 foresees
performance-based funding. Concretely, it aims to define criteria for explicit
resource allocation, primarily based on achieving measurable results in each of
the key areas of university activities: teaching, research and technological
development, and transfer of knowledge and innovation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives. Addressing societal challenges is receiving
growing attention in Spain. The EESTI (2013-2020) and PECTI (2013-2016) follow
the efforts of previous measures and increase their focus on promoting RDI
within societal challenges. The EESTI includes the ‘promotion of RDI towards
societal challenges’ as one of its four general objectives. The new PECTI gives
special emphasis to its integration into the ERA and to the promotion of: a)
excellent basic research; b) technological, industrial and firm leadership; and
c) scientific and technical research and innovation capabilities on grand
challenges.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Spain allocated to transnationally
coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Spain dedicated
to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than
the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third
Countries is fostered by the FP. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the
share of participation of Spain in total participation is 9.4 % and the country
received 7.8 % of total EC contributions. FP funding represents EUR 61 per
inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4 % of
the GERD for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD
for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in 10 of the 10
on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change, Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, the Demographic change (More Years, Better
Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water Challenges for a
Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe -
Global Challenges, Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in four programmes. In Horizon 2020, the
country is already involved in all four existing initiatives: AAL2, EDCTP2,
EMPIR, Eurostars2.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular preparing and implementing joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 107 ERA-NETs, of which 33 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in eight ERA-NET
Plus actions, of which four are still running, in areas with high European
added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Spain
is currently involved in several EU-supported joint research agendas (Joint
Programming Initiatives, Article 196/185; ERA-NETs; ERA-NET PLUS) and has
issued joint calls with European countries involving several stakeholders
addressing grand challenges.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, Spain has
not developed a specific policy. In the context of its traditional relationship
with Latin America, Spain has several cooperation programmes with this region.
One of the most outstanding ones is the ‘Iber-American Programme of Science and
Technology for Development.’ Moreover, the Spanish government has several
general bilateral cooperation agreements with Third Countries, such as Canada,
China, India, Korea, United States and Japan. Besides these general programmes,
Spain also has bilateral cooperation programmes in some specific fields with
Brazil (biotechnology, renewable energies, process engineering, nano technology
and health) and Argentina (biomedical, forensic and vegetal genomics and
bioinformatics). It is not known whether the country monitors the
implementation of cooperation programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Spain allocated
to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is similar to the
EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is similar to the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing Joint
Programmes are not specifically addressed by the EESTI in Spain. 
However,
some measures facilitate the interoperability. According to the Law of Science,
Technology and Innovation, joint European measures in the field of intellectual
property rights (IPR) are supported. The international programming website of
the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness  also lists the open and closed
joint calls.
Funding
agencies do not implement Money follows Cooperation, a scheme which allows
small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils
to be conducted in a different country. 
Funding
agencies do not implement Money follows Researchers, a scheme enables
researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer
on-going grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities
according to original terms and objectives.
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards
is not systematically supported but often takes place in bilateral or
multilateral programmes. Funders do not systematically apply the so called
'Lead agency' procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the
results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’
and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective
countries. 
Strategies
and plans are increasingly based on some sort of evaluation analysis. Under the
mandate of the MINECO, the FECYT carried out yearly evaluations of the R&D
public calls for proposals from 2006-2010. Currently, the Ministry has decided
to carry out evaluations with a longer time frame. The CDTI evaluates most of
the business-oriented instruments, but these evaluations are not publically
available for 2012-2013.
The
new plan implementing the Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and
Innovation (PECTI) foresees increasing international peer review through
programmes of support to R&D centres of excellence.
The
ANECA (National Agency of Evaluation, Quality and Accreditation) is a national
agency, which aims to monitor and evaluate the quality of the university
system. According to its website, the agency has signed mutual recognition
agreements with several international agencies, such as the ones from Austria,
France, The Netherlands, Flanders, Poland, and Costa Rica.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 88.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Spain allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is lower than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Spain
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RI): the European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche
Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European
Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO),
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.5 % of GBAORD to the
activities carried out by CERN, EMBL,ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European
Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participating in the development of Ris included in the European
Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Spain participates
in the preparatory phase of 38 of them (80 %). The country coordinates one of
them: EU-SOLARIS .
In
terms of financial commitment to developing these Ris, Spain is committed to
funding 12 of them. They are: LIFEWATCH, IFMIF/EVEDA, EATRIS, ECRIN, ELIXIR, 
INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, ESSneutrons, XFEL, ILL 20/20, PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regards to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Spain is involved in two of the seven consortia, which adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of Ris of European interest involving several European countries. Spain
is member of ECRIN-ERIC and observer in EATRIS ERIC.
In
terms of support for developing and implementing RIs, the EESTI considers the
‘sustainability and use of scientific and technological infrastructures’ as one
of its specific objectives (sub-objective 2). And the PECTI follows the
strategy and devotes one of its sub-programmes (number four) to research
infrastructures. 
The
Spanish roadmap of Unique Scientific and Technological Infrastructures (ICTS)
for national and regional RIs of pan-European interest was adopted in 2010 and
provided an annual budget of  EUR 22 million for the 2010-2013 period. 
At
least three large ESFRI installations will be hosted in the country: the
construction in Catalonia of one of the five supercomputers in Europe of the
Partnership for Advanced Computing; the solar research infrastructure
(EU-SOLARIS) at the Advanced Technological Centre for Renewable Energy in
Almeria; and the European Spallation Source (ESS) in the Basque Country, an
advanced centre for researching the atomic and molecular arrangement for
materials. 
The
budget cuts are causing delays in the payment of Spain's financial contribution
to some international RIs.
The
Conference of Presidents of the Spanish regions agreed to create 24 new
singular scientific Ris in the period 2007-2015.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI) from 2011 includes a provision
to remove legal barriers to access RIs, to conform with EU provisions.
On
e-infrastructures, FECYT and the Spanish Public Universities and Research
Libraries Network (REBIUN) launched a national joint programme called RECOLECTA
or Recolector de Ciencia Abierta (Open Science Harvester). RECOLECTA is a
platform that gathers all the national open access scientific repositories and
provides services to repository managers, researchers and decision-makers.
The
objectives of RECOLECTA are:
•           To
promote and coordinate the national infrastructure of open access digital
scientific repositories in an interoperable manner based on the standards
adopted by the global community,
•           To
foster, support and facilitate the adoption of open access policies by all
researchers from R&D centers and universities, the main producers of
scientific knowledge in Spain,
•           To
give greater visibility and both domestic and international application of the
results from research carried out in Spain.
 
No
concrete information was found on defining common rules to access RIs remotely,
to access confidential data and regarding IPRs.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 10.6 in Spain compared
with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.
In
2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).Ttransparency in recruitment is governed by
Law 19/2013 ‘on transparency, access to public information and good
governance.’ This law is of application in public universities, independent
organisations and State agencies belonging to the general, regional or local
administration. Any organisation receiving public subsidies above EUR 100 000,
or  corresponding to more than 40 % of its annual income, is obliged to make
its procedures public (active dissemination of information) and ensure free
access to the related information.  
In
2013, 904 positions in Spanish organisations were published on the EURAXESS
Jobs Portal. This represents 2.25 % of the total number of jobs published that
year.
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Spain in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Spain_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 130 235 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Spain in 2011. This
represents 5.6 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 5.3 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Law on Science, Technology and Innovation includes provisions on adopting and
implementing the Charter and Code. Additionally, the EURAXESS Network in Spain,
through 76 Service Centres (present in most Autonomous Communities), actively
promotes the EURAXESS Rights initiative on implementing the Charter and Code.
By
May 2014, 21 Spanish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which eight had received the ‘Human
Resource Excellence in Research’ logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter and Code.
The
Law on Science, Technology and Innovation creates a clear researcher career
path by regulating the contractual agreements signed between the researchers
and host institutions. Under this scheme, researchers are considered as civil
servants, but the specificities of the research profession are taken into
account. Moreover, researchers always have the option of choosing a non-civil
servant career path.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
1.2 in 2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
In
order to increase the number of students taking science to a doctoral level,
the Spanish government has implemented the Master Plan for Mentoring and
Guidance of Students. The Spanish government has not adopted specific policies
to increase female representation. However, some autonomous communities have
adopted measures to increase the number of women with doctorates. For example,
in the Asturias 64 % of all PhD students are women. 
The
Secretariat of State for Research, Development and Innovation of the Ministry
of the Economy and Competitiveness supports researcher training, including the
presentation of a doctoral thesis. Until 2013, this was known as the Formación
de Personal Investigador (FPI) programme, but is now known as ‘Ayudas para
contratos predoctorales para la formación de doctores’, i.e. grants for
pre-doctoral contracts for doctoral training. In December 2013, EUR 6.7 million
was approved for four years (2013-2016) for five centres in total to allow
centres of excellence (those recognised under the FP7) to hire predoctoral
researchers (‘Ayudas para contratos predoctorales Severo Ochoa para la
formación de doctores 2013’).
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
Spain in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship from
another EU-27 MS was 5.2 %  compared to 4.2% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 18 % in Spain
compared to 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 24.2 %. 
The
CLARIN programme aims to attract researchers currently working in foreign
institutions to pursue a research career in the Autonomous Community of the
Principality of Asturias.
The
ongoing subprogramme of specialisation in international organisations funds
researchers, technologists, and science and technology managers to spend one to
two years in an international scientific institution in another country.
Following this period, the beneficiary has to develop a one-year project in a
Spanish public research centre or technology-based enterprise.
The
ongoing EMPLEA programme is designed to promote talent and employability
through incentives for hiring and training RDI managers in a wide range of
entities. This includes hiring experts in transferring and adding value to
knowledge, including the preparation of proposals, provision of advice,
management and provision of ongoing impetus to Horizon 2020 projects. The
support takes the form of low-interest loans and a subsidy towards the cost of
training these experts.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Spain
has set up specific laws or actions to implement EU legislation in the field of
research. Furthermore, the national authorities request the adoption and
implementation of gender equality plans in research performing organisations. 
The
Strategic Plan for equal opportunities (2008-2011) includes gender issues in
research. The Strategic Plan for Equal Opportunities (2014-2016) defines the
objectives and priority measures to eliminate any discrimination on grounds of
gender to achieve equal opportunities for women and men. It includes specific
measures addressing research performing organisations (RPOs) and research
policy.
The
Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI 2011), the Spanish Strategy for
Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) and the plan (PECTI) implementing it,
support positive changes regarding gender equality and mainstreaming in
research. Notably, the LCTI introduces a provision according to which public
research bodies should adopt within two years ‘gender balance plans’ that will
be  monitored yearly. 
There
are national and regional institutes for women that promote gender equality and
the gender dimension.
The
Women's Institute, founded in the early 1980s, is an autonomous body,
responsible for promoting and fostering the conditions that enable gender equality
and women's participation in political, cultural, economic and social life.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 77 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 14.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
Spain
has measures supporting return after paternal leave. The LCTI guarantees the
recognition of unemployment benefits and maternity leave for researchers, but
only provided they have a permanent contract.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Spain
has set up provisions to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes
and/or projects. 
As
foreseen in the LCTI, the EESTI includes ‘gender equality’ and ‘gender
dimension in research’ as one of its five basic principles and the PECTI
mentions gender as a horizontal measure. However, there is not a specific
programme to tackle these issues.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making,  the LCTI establishes that the evaluation
and selection committees of the research system should follow the gender
balance principle so that no gender group will account for no more than 60 % or
less than 40 %. 
TThe
LCTI also addresses the issue monitoring gender balance at organisation level
with two specific requirements: (1) the Information System of Science,
Technology and Innovation (SICTI) should collect, treat and disseminate data
disaggregated by gender, including indicators on the share of women and
productivity and (2) Public Research Bodies should adopt within two years
gender balance plans that will be monitored yearly, as mentioned above.
The
Law for Equality (2007), the Law of Universities (2007) and the Equality Plan
in the Public Administration (2011) also require a gender-balanced
representation when composing committees.
At
least 14 universities have plans on gender equality, according to the Women’s Institute.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 44.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees
for leading researchers in research performing organisations is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Spain is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
The
EESTI includes as an ‘Articulation mechanism’ the promotion of open access to
data, publications and research results financed by public funds, including
guidelines to create shared archives. The PECTI includes the promotion of open
access through technological forums and platforms.
Regarding
open access to publications, the Law of Science, Technology and Innovation
(LCTI) (2011) indicates that publicly-funded research publications have to be
made publicly available after, at the latest, an embargo period of 12 months.
These publications have to be included in an open access repository. Also,
universities and public research organisations should promote the development
of open access institutional repositories.
There
are some regional regulations (e.g. Asturias, Madrid and Catalonia) that
promote open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications at regional level.
Moreover,
up to 26 national research organisations and universities have developed their
own open access to publications policy. 
RECOLECTA
is a platform that gathers all the national scientific repositories and
provides services to repository managers, researchers and decision-makers.
Since 2007, it is the result of the collaboration between the Spanish
Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT) and the Network of Spanish
University Libraries (REBIUN) run by the Conference of Vice-Chancellors of
Spanish Universities (CRUE). Today RECOLECTA has 60 institutional open access
repositories. 
Spain
was one of the leading countries to sign the Alhambra Declaration (2010) along
with a group of open access stakeholders (e.g. editors, librarians, funding
agencies, university rectors and authors) from South European countries (Spain,
Portugal, France, Italy, Greece and Turkey), whose main languages are different
from English, to promote open access to scientific publications.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 74.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support open
access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the EESTI specifically promotes open access to data. FECYT
represents Spain in the consortium of OpenAIRE Plus. It is a 30 month project,
funded by the FP7, and its mission is to facilitate access to the ERA’s open
access scientific production of the , providing cross-links from publications
to data and funding schemes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support open
access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, OpenDoar, a website directory of academic open access
repositories, indicates that Spain has 109 open-access repositories. 
Latindex
and Dialnet are repositories for research publications done in Spanish and
Portuguese-speaking countries. 
The
FECYT (Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología – Spanish Foundation
for Science and Technology) facilitates access to bibliographic research
information (Web of Knowledge and Scopus) for researchers working at national
research organisations. At regional and institutional level, purchases by
consortia of university libraries are common. REBIUN provides access to the
archives of 74 public universities and exchanges.
Regarding
e-infrastructures, the national joint programme called RECOLECTA provides a
free open access platform and support to Spanish repositories so that they
comply with international standards of interoperability and sustainability.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Spain has not developed a specific knowledge transfer strategy.
However, the LCTI, EESTI and PECTI encourage open circulation of knowledge
between companies and research organisations. 
The
LCTI introduced changes in the IPR domain so that researchers can benefit from
their patent earnings. It also introduced other changes to facilitate knowledge
transfer: (1) increasing the value of transfer activities, (2) promoting the
‘units of excellence’, or (3) developing an open-access archive with research
results. The LCTI encourages the creation of Technology Based Enterprises
(EBTs) by allowing researchers to work part-time in private firms created by
the organisations in which they are working and eliminating restrictions to the
maximum share ownership of a private company (10 %) and being a board member in
private companies.
Two
calls provide funding (EUR 267 million) to promote the collaboration between
research centers and universities and the private sector in R&I projects
One
of the specific objectives of the PECTI is to increase public-private
cooperation in RDI. The plan does not refer to specific agreements, but to
specific projects. In this context, Spain has recently designed support
schemes. The ‘Business leadership programme’ provides public funding (EUR 831.9
million) through its three sub-programmes: (1) private RDI; (2) enabling
technologies; and (3) collaborative RDI.  The Torres Quevedo Programme (EUR
22.5 million) provides funding to recruit doctors with a proven working track
record in companies. The Torres Quevedo Programme (EUR 22.5 million) provides
funding to the recruitment of doctors with a proven working track record in
companies.
Spain
is a member of EDUgain through SIR. RedIRIS is the Spanish National Research
and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated
to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the
country.
Concerning
open innovation, Spain has decided to focus on preparing an annual plan that
will facilitate the knowledge management (more than knowledge transfer).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 11.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 57.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Spain has not set up a strategy for
its implementation. The country has implemented a research and education
network, essential to make digital services possible.
RedIRIS
is the Spanish National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised
Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and
education communities within the country.
Concerning
digital research services, FECYT provides access to bibliographic research
databases (Web of Science and Scopus) to Spanish researchers. In addition,
FECYT offers to researchers a Normalised Curriculum Vitae (CVN), that is a
national standard  between institutions that facilitates the data interchange
and the research evaluation processes.
The
country provides federated services, like the services offered by FECYT to
access to the main bibliographic research database (Web of Science), cloud
services, and collaboration support.
The
Digital Agenda for Spain is a soft action adopted in 2013 that provides a
framework reference and a roadmap for the Digital Agenda strategy for 2013-2015
in order to develop the digital economy and society. One of its main objectives
is to increase the efficiency of information technology investments in RDI.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 59.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 34.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Spain
was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is member of
EDUgain through SIR, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) partner federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 128 research performing organisations in Spain answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 18.7% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Spain shows that 39.5 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 48.4 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 12.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 59.2 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 39.0 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.8 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
However,
it should be noted that some regional authorities, which fund research, did not
responded to the survey. 
Also,
one very important research performing organisations is amongst the 'ERA
limited compliance group' and this makes some indicators lower. 
For
the indicator 'Share of institutional funding allocated based on institutional
assessment and/or evaluation', it should be noted that the majority of
respondents to this question did not specify how much was based on an
institutional assessment. 
For
the indicator 'Share of funder's research and development budget dedicated to
jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations', it should
be noted that the low percentage is due to the fact that  foreseen calls were
not launched on time, due to budgetary restrictions.
For
the indicator 'Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading
researchers in research performing organisations', it should be noted that the
result is considerably higher than the EU average, due to the existence of
binding legislation.
For
the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst
research performing organisations', it should be noted the existence of the new
law, but it has not yet been enforced.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 National Agency for Research || 2013 || X || X 
 Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) || 2013 || X || X 
 Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016) || 2013 || X || X 
 Research and Innovation Strategy for the Smart Specialisation of the regions || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Joint Programming Initiatives Article 185 initiatives ||   ||   ||   
 Bilateral and multilateral agreements in research ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National research infrastructure roadmap - Update || 2013 || X || X 
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Conference of Presidents of the Regions (agreement to create new research infrastructures) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Statute for Research Interns || 2006 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Human resources training programme "Salvador de Madariaga" ||   ||   ||   
 Ramon y Cajal Programme (RyC) posdoctoral senior grants || 2005 ||   ||   
 Juan de la Cierva Programme || 2004 ||   ||   
 Euraxess in Spain || 2004 ||   ||   
 Accreditation and grants 'Centros de Excelencia Severo Ochoa' || 2013 || X || X 
 International and inter-sectoral mobility 
 Blueprint of a Law to support entrepreneurs and their internationalisation || 2013 || X || X 
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 The Women's Institute || 1980 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Strategic Plan for equal opportunities || 2008 ||   ||   
 14 University plans on gender equality ||   ||   ||   
 National and regional Institutes for women  promote gender equality and the gender dimension ||   ||   ||   
 Strategic Plan for Equal Opportunities (2014-2016) || 2014 || X || X 
 Law for Equality || 2007 ||   ||   
 Law of Universities || 2007 ||   ||   
 Equality Plan in the Public Administration (2011) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Digital Agenda for Spain || 2013 || X || X 
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation” (PECTI) (2013-2016) || 2013 || X || X 
 Alhambra Declaration on Open Access || 2010 ||   ||   
 RECOLECTA || 2007 ||   ||   
 Latindex and Dialnet provide open access to publicationsdone in Spanish or Portuguese ||   ||   ||   
 REBIUN (Spanish Public Universities and Research Libraries Network) provides access to searches to the archives of 74 institutions || 2002 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Subprogramme of Institutional Strengthening in the PECTI || 2008 ||   ||   
 INNPACTO subprogramme || 2010 ||   ||   
 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI 2011) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Business leadership programme || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 RECOLECTA || 2007 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 IRIS Network || 1988 ||   ||   
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Education and
Culture (MEC) and the Ministry of Employment and the Economy (MEE). The
Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) is responsible for higher education and
science policy related matters, whilst MEE is in charge of technological
development and innovation policy. These two ministries account for over 80 %
of government research and development (R&D) funding (with MEC totalling
approximately 45 % of funding and MEE around 36 % in 2011). The Research and
Innovation Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, advises the Government and
its ministries on research, technology and innovation issues. The Council is
responsible for the strategic development and coordination of Finnish science
and technology policy as well as of the national innovation system as a whole.
The
  Academy of Finland, Tekes and the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation are
the key public funders. The Academy of Finland (with a budget of EUR 329
million in 2013) mostly funds basic research through competitive grants. Tekes
(with a budget of EUR 542 million in 2013) funds projects carried out by
research institutes, universities and businesses. An additional funder, the
Strategic Research Council, which will be established in 2014 under the
auspices of the Academy of Finland and should be fully operational in 2015
(with a budget of approximately EUR 60 million in 2015), will fund challenge-driven
research. At the level of public research performers, the Finnish public
research system includes universities and public research organisations.
The
‘Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015’ (Research and
Innovation Council) and the ‘Growth through expertise, Action plan for research
and innovation policy’ (Ministry of Education and Culture and Ministry of
Employment and the Economy, 2012) are two key policy documents that set out, at
national level, the policy guidelines on the required measures and funding, and
detail the actions required for implementing the government’s research and
innovation policy. The Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2015-2020,
currently under preparation, are due to be published by the end of 2014.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Finland represented EUR 382 per inhabitant
in 2012, more than twice the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per
inhabitant was EUR 369. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.9 % of total
government expenditures and 1.1 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Finland has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a
share of GDP has evolved positively in Finland even when it regressed at EU-28
level.
A
tax incentive for R&D activity and a double depreciation allowance for
industrial investments were made available for businesses in 2013 and 2014.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
funding is mainly allocated by the Academy of Finland and Tekes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 91.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are systematically used to
allocate project-based funding by the Academy of Finland. The Academy uses the
following principles: scientific quality and innovativeness of the research
plan, competence of the applicant/research team, feasibility of the research
plan, cooperation contacts for the research and significance of the research
project for advancing professional careers in research and for researcher
training. Moreover, the ‘independence’ and ‘international’ components of peer
review evaluations are strengthened under the Research and Innovation Policy
Guidelines for 2011–2015. Evaluation based on the core principles of
international peer review is not used by Tekes for its project-based funding,
mainly because international peer review is not considered to fit with industry
needs and the requirements for short 'time to grant'.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is always allocated based on institutional assessment. The 2013 and
2014 reforms introduced a new funding model for universities and universities
of applied sciences. This new funding model aims at increasing the performance
of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and at addressing the fragmentation
problem. The formula for institutional funding for universities includes a
research and international component, which amounts to 34 % of the funding: 1)
number of refereed international publications, 2) number of other scientific
publications and 3) funds obtained from competitive calls. If universities do
not perform well in terms of research, their institutional funding will
decrease. Moreover, a reform package aimed at restructuring public research
organisations was approved in September 2013 by the Government.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Finland who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of
institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
There
is no overarching legislation governing Finland’s participation in joint initiatives.
However, the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015 support
the principle of opening up of programmes for voluntary joint pilot projects of
Member States (MS). Given that Finland is a relatively small country,
participating in cross-border joint initiatives has typically ranked high on
the R&I agenda. In order to boost research related to grand challenges, the
Finnish government will set up the Strategic Research Council under the
auspices of the Academy of Finland. The Strategic Research Council, which
should be fully operational in 2015, will act as a 'third major funder' and
will have a budget of EUR 70 million in 2017.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Finland allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Finland dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of MS, Associated Countries and third countries is
fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7),
the share of Finland's participation is 2.3 % and the country received 2.5 % of
total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 164 per inhabitant (EU average
EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.6 % of the Gross Domestic
Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data)
(EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in nine of the 10
on-going initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years,
Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world,
Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans and Urban Europe - Global Challenges,
Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the
country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 77 ERA-NETs, of which 18 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in 12 ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which seven are still running, in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Finland is well represented in the European research landscape, being a member of all major
European research organisations (e.g. European Space Agency).
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Finland has set up several agreements. Tekes has established cooperation agreements with
funding agencies in the United States, Japan, China, Canada, Israel, Singapore and Korea. Tekes is also involved in Finnish Israeli Technology (FIT), a joint
programme between Finland and Israel for technology applications in different
technology areas. The Academy of Finland  also provides funding for
international joint projects through various targeted calls, often as part of
its research programmes or in the context of bilateral or multilateral
agreements with countries such as China, India, Japan, Brazil and Russia. Finland is notably active in the Nordic research co-operation (NordForsk), now
expanding to the Baltic States, and Arctic research. Moreover, the Team Finland
initiative supports the internationalisation of key Finnish players and joint
initiatives between businesses and public organisations.
The
implementation of cooperation programmes is monitored by the respective
institutions.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Finland allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is similar to within the EU
ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
With
regards to the cross-border interoperability of national programmes, the
Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015 support the
implementation of effective principles, procedures and criteria and voluntary
joint pilot projects between MS. Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform
to international peer-review standards are routinely performed as part of joint
calls. In its international programmes, notably within the framework of
Nordforsk programmes, the Academy of Finland allows for the mutual recognition
of evaluations. According to the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for
2011-2015, the ‘independence’ of evaluations and their ‘international’
component are strengthened. The Academy of Finland implements Money follows
researchers, a scheme enables researchers moving to a research institution in a
different country to transfer on-going grant funding to the new institution and
continue research activities according to original terms and objectives. Tekes
funding schemes allow researchers to move to a research institution or company
abroad, however, the grant cannot be transferred (researchers are considered as
seconded employees of the organisation receiving Tekes funding).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 40.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Finland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is
higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national
and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Finland
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
ESA, CERN, EFDA-JET, EMBL, ESO, FAIR and ESRF. In 2012, the country contributes
0.8% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), and the European Commission’s
Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures (RIs)
included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI)
Roadmap, Finland participates in the preparatory phase of 19 of them (38 %) and
the country coordinates none of them. In terms of financial commitments to
developing RIs, Finland is committed to fund 13 of them. They are: CESSDA,
CLARIN, EISCAT_3D, European Social Survey (ESS), EURO-ARGO, BBMRI, EATRIS,
ELIXIR, INFRAFRONTIER, INSTRUCT, ICOS, FAIR, PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regard to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Finland participates in three of the seven consortiums, which adopted
the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment
and operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries.
They are EATRIS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.
In
terms of support for developing and implementing RIs, there has been increased
acknowledgment about the importance of a RI policy at national level. The
Finnish Research Infrastructure Committee (FIRI) Committee, set up by the Academy of Finland, is responsible for developing Finland’s RI roadmap. FIRI released the
update of the Finnish national roadmap in March 2014. Finland’s strategy and roadmap for research infrastructures 2014–2020 updates the 2009
roadmap for RIs and includes a list of priority infrastructures. The roadmap
includes references to the participating in the development of RIs mentioned in
the ESFRI roadmap. In terms of financial commitments, the Finnish government
also plans to spend approximately EUR 20 million per year on developing and
upgrading research infrastructures.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Regarding
access to RIs, it is reported that cross-border access measures are implemented
systematically in Finland. However, there is no overall policy to facilitate
cross-border access to RIs.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Finland in the Researcher’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Finland
_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 40,003 FTE researchers in Finland in 2011. This represents 14.9
researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the Innovation Union
reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 7.2 in Finland compared to 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 56 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Higher
education institutions (HEIs), as they are independent employers, have
considerable autonomy in the recruitment policy. Therefore, the situation
varies from institution to institution. In general, all Finnish universities
post their open vacancies online. Platforms may vary between universities and
fields. All open vacancies in the public research institutes are published on a
national website. Many institutions have policies to publish job vacancies on
relevant Europe-wide online platforms, including EURAXESS.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Charter and Code principles were signed by the Rectors' Council of the Finnish
universities and the Academy of Finland in 2009. The principles are being
promoted through national higher education and research policy.
By
May 2014, 12 Finnish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which six had received the 'HR Excellence
in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.
According
to the Government programme the funding of higher education was reformed to
better support the objectives of education, including higher completion of
studies rates, quicker transfer to work, enhanced administration, improvement
in the quality of education and research, internationalisation, and the
profiling of higher education institutions in their own areas of strength.
Universities apply a four-stage career system in research and education
(doctoral student, post-doctoral fellow, independent senior researcher and
professor) to make careers in research more predictable and transparent. A
start has been made on implementing tenure track systems in the recruiting
processes. While developing their researcher career processes, universities are
collaborating with other organisations to enable flexible mobility between
employers to facilitate common interests.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34
was 2.7 in 2011 compared to 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and
an EU average of 1.7.
According
to the ‘National Guidelines for the Development of Doctoral Training’ (2011),
universities are encouraged to offer students equal opportunities and rights in
doctoral programmes regardless of their discipline, promote PhD training by
integrating at least one Graduate School into the university structure, enhance
the quality of graduate education in all disciplines, introduce four-year
full-time structured education in all disciplines (target time frame), provide
guidance and promote personal study plans, enhance interdisciplinarity,
internalisation and intersectoral mobility, and incorporate systematic PhD
training in all doctoral programmes, including transferable skills training,
theoretical elements  and research. Since 2011, all Finnish universities have
adjusted their doctoral training with these guidelines.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
  Finland in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of
another EU-27 Member State was 6.4 % compared to 9.1 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.8 % in Finland compared to 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2 %. 
In
line with the Strategy for Internationalisation of HEIs in Finland, HEIs
actively participate in EU education and research programmes and in ‘Nordplus’
mobility programmes of the Nordic and Baltic countries, in creating joint
Masters degree programmes in the EU and the Nordic countries, and increasing
Nordic research and innovation cooperation. The mobility of researchers,
teachers and other personnel is also being promoted. In addition, the Finish
Distinguished Professor Programme (FiDiPro) aims to strengthen scientific
knowledge and know-how, add a more international element to the Finnish
research system, bring added value into the national innovation system and
support the research-driven profiling of universities and research institutes.
Through this programme, universities and research institutes can hire foreign
or Finnish professor-level researchers who have worked abroad for extended
periods to conduct and promote research in Finland for a fixed period. 
It
is part of the remit of the Academy of Finland to promote international
networking and activities of Finnish researchers, as well as support them in their
international collaboration at foreign universities and research institutes.
The Academy also provides funding for international joint projects through
various targeted calls, often as part of its research programmes or in the
context of bilateral or multilateral agreements with China, Estonia, Germany, India, Japan and Russia, as well as Brazil and Chile.
The
Development plan for Education and Research 2011-2016 aims to increase research
cooperation and mobility between business enterprises, higher education
institutions and research institutes across sectoral boundaries.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Regarding
national policies on gender equality, Finland has adopted a regulatory
framework and a series of soft measures to promote gender equality in research.
The Equality Act specifically supports gender equality by requiring HEIs and
RPOs (public research organisations) to draw up and implement gender equality
plans. 
Gender
equality in HEIs is also steered through MEC. The promotion of gender equality
in human resources policies is one of the objectives for HEI, which have to
report on their actions to the Ministry.
Moreover,
the Academy of Finland is active in promoting gender equality through its
Equality Plan (2014–2016), which applies to the Academy staff and researchers
receiving funding from the Academy. According to the plan, efforts must be
taken to establish an open, transparent expert review procedure in which the
qualifications of applicants of either gender sex are evaluated equally and
fairly. The Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2012-2015 provides
support to gender equality within HEIs. The plan requires the monitoring of
gender equality plans and promotes the development of gender-based statistics.
Gender
equality in the labour market is also implemented through the amended Finnish
Equality Act (2005) that specifies the obligations of authorities and
employers. Compliance with the Equality Act is regularly monitored by the
Ombudsman for Equality and the Equality Board.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 36.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within
the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Regarding
female researchers' careers, the 'Criteria for research funding decisions' of
the Academy of Finland include objectives on women’s promotion as a research
owner/manager.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Regarding
the gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no reported
measures.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 31.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average
share.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, Finland has adopted measures to support
gender equality when decisions on research positions and research funding are
made (Government Action Plan for Gender Equality (2012-2015) and Academy of Finland Criteria for research funding decisions).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 50.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Finland is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, several measures have been adopted since 2005
(see below). More recently, the Ministry of Education and Culture launched the
Open Science and Research Project 2014–2017 (ATT) to foster open access to
scientific information (publications, data and methods). There is however no
overall legislative or policy provision supporting open access to scientific
publications and data. Several working groups are being established to develop
issues (policies, indicators, intellectual property rights, etc.) related to
access to scientific information. In addition, a roadmap for 2014-2017 is being
established, outlining the national targets with the overall intent of Finland being a world leader in open science and research by 2017.
Related
to open access to publications, a working group on open access produced a
report containing recommendations, which will be implemented as part of the ATT
Project. 
Moreover,
the Open Data Programme, adopted in 2012 within the framework of the public
sector information and communication technology (ICT) strategy, coordinates
measures and projects aimed at increasing the opening and use of scientific
publications. Whilst both the Academy of Finland and Tekes support open access
to publications, the latter does not constitute a mandatory funding criterion
within the Academy or Tekes funding programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 46.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the Academy of Finland supports open access to research
data, however the latter does not constitute a funding criterion within the
Academy programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 55.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations
making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research
data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, a national policy for the long term storage and
reservation of data is not available yet. However, a national infrastructure
for the long-term storage and reservation of cultural and research data is
available as of 2014. Moreover, several measures such as the Open Data
Programme and the ATT Project specifically are aimed at addressing this policy
issue. Moreover, the National Digital Library supports digital
services/infrastructure for accessing and preserving scientific information. At
stakeholder level, the research data repository project on FinnOA gathers
professionals interested in promoting open access to scientific information. In
addition, most Finnish universities run their own scientific publications
repositories, however the repositories are mostly used for storing materials
such as students’ thesis, courses and other publications by the university. The
DSpace User Group, which was set up under a project led by the National Library
of Finland, supports the technical development of repositories at universities.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Finland has adopted several measures to support public-private
linkages. The Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation (SHOKs)
have constituted one of the key instruments supporting cooperation between
academia, research institutes and the private sector. The 2013 international
evaluation of SHOKs indicates that progress could have been faster and that
SHOKs should become more strategic. The objective is to raise the ambition
level and to speed up the renewal of industries, for instance by ensuring that
Tekes funding is more competitive and targeted to high-quality and
cross-disciplinary research carried out via international collaborations.
Through
its research funding, Tekes also supports cooperation between the public
research sector and businesses. The specific Tekes funding scheme for research
institutions allows scientists to take the development of an idea further while
preparing for the commercialisation of the idea into new business. Tekes also
supports the creation, management and follow-up of spin-offs through the
‘Funding for young innovative companies’ initiative (YIC). Finland has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support
knowledge tranfer, open access, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
Finland
has adopted several measures in relation to implementing the Digital European
Research Area (ERA). Finland has adopted several measures. The 2012 ‘Growth
through expertise: Action plan for research and innovation policy’ outlines Finland’s strategy towards developing infrastructure for storing and managing digital
research and innovation data. The country has implemented a research and
education network, essential to making digital services possible. Finland is member of eduGAIN through HAKA. FUNET is the Finnish National Research and
Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to
supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the
country and covering approximately 350,000 users. Finland has not set up a
strategy for implementing the Digital ERA.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated and Premium services. Support
to digital services is provided through Finland’s overall strategy ‘Putting
data into use: A roadmap for the use of electronic data in research’ adopted in
2011. At stakeholder level, the Owela platform for co-design constitutes an
example of action supporting research collaboration platforms. The CSC-IT
Centre For Science Ltd also provides a wide selection of digital research
services (scientific software, databases) to academia, research institutes and
businesses.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
No
overarching policy on electronic identity for researchers has been identified,
although electronic identity is implemented. HAKA federation, the identity
federation for the Finnish research and education sector, was established in
2005, with partial funding by MEC. In 2006, the Ministry introduced the
large-scale adoption of the HAKA federation as a key strategic goal to enhance
the IT infrastructure and services for research, education and culture. HAKA is
a member of the eduGAIN inter-federation service.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 62 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 20 research performing organisations in Finland answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 15.7% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Finland shows that 44.4 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 38.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 16.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 77.3 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 21.5 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.2 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
In
terms of funders, it should be noted that one major funder did not reply to the
survey. This means that all indicators related to funders should be interpreted
with caution. The response rate amongst research performing is relatively good,
although two major research organisations did not reply to the survey.
For
the indicator 'Share of funders supporting gender equality in research', the
figure is an underestimation, as one of the major funders replied that this
dimension is not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Finland's National Reform Programme - tax incentives || 2013 || X || X 
 Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Growth through expertise, Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||   
 Evaluation of the Research and Innovation Council || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Competitive funding by TEKES ||   ||   ||   
 International evaluation of the Academy of Finland || 2013 || X || X 
 International evaluation of TEKES || 2012 || X ||   
 Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines || 2010 ||   ||   
 Competitive funding by Academy of Finland ||   ||   ||   
 Peer review process by the Academy of Finland ||   ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Universities Act 558/2009 and related decrees on the reform of university funding model || 2010 ||   ||   
 Reform of public research institutes (incl. their funding model) || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Joint programmes and bilateral agreements ||   ||   ||   
 Team Finland Strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 The Money Follows Researcher (MFR) agreement signed by the Academy of Finland ||   ||   ||   
 Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Finland’s strategy and roadmap for research infrastructures 2014–2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Growth through expertise, Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||   
 Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 National Guidelines for the Development of Doctoral Training || 2011 ||   ||   
 Signature of the 'European Charter for Researchers’ & the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers by the Rectors' Council of the Finnish universities and the Academy of Finland || 2009 ||   ||   
 Strategy for the Internationalisation of Finnish  Education, Research and Innovation 2009–2015 || 2009 ||   ||   
 EURAXESS Finland ||   ||   ||   
 Finland Distinguished Professor Programme (FiDiPro) ||   ||   ||   
 Reform of the doctoral training system in line with the principles of innovative doctoral training ||   ||   ||   
 Academy of Finland grants and fellowships ||   ||   ||   
 Academy of Finland grants and fellowships ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Steering of HEIs || 2012 || X ||   
 Academy of Finland Equality Plan ||   ||   ||   
 Academy of Finland 'Criteria for research funding decision' ||   ||   ||   
 The Equality Act ||   ||   ||   
 Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2012-2015 || 2012 || X ||   
 Finnish Equality Act (2005) || 2005 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open Science and Research Project 2014–2017 || 2014 || X || X 
 Open Data Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 Working group on open access to publications and research data as part of the National Research Data Project (TTA) ||   ||   ||   
 National Digital Library ||   ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation (SHOKs) - International evaluation || 2007 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 FUNET, the Finnish National Research and Education Network ||   ||   ||   
 'Putting data into use', Roadmap for the utilisation of electronic data in research || 2011 ||   ||   
 CSC - IT Centre For Science Ltd ||   ||   ||   
 Growth through expertise: Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Member of Edugain ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
In
  France, under the overall responsibility of the cabinet, the research and
innovation (R&I) policy is driven by two government ministries. The
Ministry of Education, Higher Education and Research (MENESR) is in charge of
both the design and the coordination of research policy. The MENESR and the
Ministry for the Economy, Industry and Digital Sector (MEIN) jointly develop
the innovation policy. The MENESR designs the policy on research-led innovation
(technology and knowledge transfer, support to entrepreneurship among students,
doctoral students, researchers, trans-sectorial mobility, etc.), while the MEIN
designs the other aspects of the innovation policy (demand-oriented innovation,
commercial exploitation, etc.) In addition, the new law of 22 July 2013 on
Higher Education and Research established a Strategic Research Council, chaired
by the Prime Minister, responsible for proposing the main orientations of the
national research strategy. The consultative High Council for Science and
Technology was therefore removed.
The
country has adopted a national strategy for R&I (SNRl); building on this
first exercise launched in 2009, a second agenda focused on research (SNR) is
to be published by the end of 2014. It shall convey, in more operational terms,
the orientations set by ‘France Europe 2020’, the country’s overarching
political Agenda for Research, Transfer and Innovation (decided in May 2013)
and subsequently approved by the law on Higher Education and Research (ESR) on
22 July 2013. For the first time, this new strategy is consistent with European
research and innovation policies, and therefore ensures coordination between
national and European research programmes. The main additional aims are to
better conduct the national research system, notably through five thematic
'Alliances', so as to better address societal grand challenges, in close
consistency with Horizon 2020.
The
main channel for R&I governmental funding is the general budget of the
Research and Higher Education Inter-ministerial Mission (MIRES). In 2014, the
budget for research under this mission (EUR 7.771 billion) has suffered a
decrease in comparison with 2013 (EUR 7.853 billion), i.e. by EUR 83,2 million
(-1,06 %).
It
is completed by extrabudgetary funding resources, under the 'Investissements
d'avenir' programmes. Some ressources are to be disbursed and some will
generate interests that will be distributed. It is managed by the
Commissariat-General for Investment, placed under the authority of MEIN, and
MENESR as far as research and development is concerned. It is expected that
'Investissements d'avenir' programmes will contribute EUR 11.81 billion to
R&D over the period 2010-2020. EUR 725.7 million should be distributed in
2014.
French
public research is mostly funded through direct institutional funding (around
89 % in 2012, according to ANRT-FutuRIS calculations, roughly confirmed by the
MESR "Note d'information" 13.06, July 2013). However, the most
important public research performing organisations allocate internally an
important part of their institutional budget based on the assessment of performance,
i.e. laboratories performance is regularly evaluated in order to define the
following year's budget.
In
terms of competitive funding (close to 12 % of total public budget in 2013,
latest figure available, provided by the ANRT), three main sources could be
quoted: national agencies, notably the National Research Agency (ANR), the
'Investissements d'avenir' programme (PIA) and the EU Framework Programmes.
In
terms of R&D funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in France represented EUR 232 per inhabitant
in 2012, above the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was
EUR 228. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.3 % of total government
expenditures and 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
France has been positive, but below the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In
terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBAORD in  France, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved more negatively
than the negative evolution observed in the EU-27. Finally, GBAORD as a share
of GDP has regressed more in France than in EU-28.
However,
as it does not include the French R&D tax credit (Crédit Impôt Recherche -
CIR), GBAORD does not reflect the total support provided by the French
government to R&D. Among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) countries, France is characterised by the highest level of
indirect government funding of R&D performed by private companies. At
global level, French R&D tax credit is probably the most advantageous for
companies performing R&D activities (for a budgetary cost of  EUR 5,17
billion in 2011 and continuously increasing: EUR 5,5 billion in 2012, EUR 5,75
billion in 2013, and EUR 6 billion estimated for 2014). However, many reports
(in particular the ones of the French Court of Auditors) are very critical on
the design of this Tax Credit Scheme, in particular because it mainly support
multinational companies instead of SMEs, and also because its increase is not
manageable properly by the State budget. The 2014 Country Specific
Recommandation (CSR) for France also invites to 'Take steps to simplify and
improve the efficiency of innovation policy, notably through an evaluation and
if necessary an adaptation of the 'crédit d’impôt recherche'. 
In
addition and in a complementary way, the new Tax Credit for Employment and
Competitiveness (CICE) is to be mentioned since innovation expenses are
supposed to be the core of the eligible scope; implemented as of January 2013,
it is planned to amount to EUR 10 billion in 2013, EUR 15 billion in 2014 and
EUR 20 billion in 2015.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
three different and dominant sources of project-based funding are the National
Research Agency's own budget, the "Investissements d'avenir" programmes
(PIA) specific resources and the Single Inter-ministerial Fund (FUI). It is
mainly awarded through a small number of executive agencies:
•           
The National Research Agency (ANR), created in 2005, which covers basic
research, applied research, innovation and technology transfer, supported
through public/public and public/private partnerships. ANR funds research
projects on a competitive basis and fully applies an international peer-review
process. As a consequence of the current Government's willingness to rebalance
the share between institutional recurrent funding and competitive funding at
the benefit of the former, the budget of ANR has decreased from EUR 742 million
in 2012 to EUR 687 million in 2013, and should be limited to EUR 605 million in
2014. But in addition, since 2010, the ANR is also the main operating agency of
the Commissariat-General for Investment, in relation to the actions of the PIA
in the field of higher education and research. As a matter of consequence, for
2014, ANR will manage EUR 600 million to be granted to excellent projects, EUR
50 million to be used as refundable advances and EUR 100 million as equity. In
accordance with the new National Research Strategy (SNR), still to be adopted,
the programming of the ANR should be designed in a coordinated manner with
European programmes;
•
          The Agency for Environment and Energy Management (ADEME) was created
in 1991 to support and fund partnership-based environment and energy research
activities. Beyond its own intervention budget (EUR 590 million for 2014),
ADEME is also designated as implementing agency of several programmes belonging
to the PIA, on behalf of the Commissariat-General for Investment;
•
          Bpifrance, the new public investment bank which replaced OSEO as of
31 December 2012, provides support for R&D and innovation projects to
businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This unique
national agency benefited from a EUR 21 billion endowment in 2013. It is
dedicated to promoting and supporting the industrial development, growth SMEs,
through innovation and to promote technology transfer.
In
addition, it has to be stressed that the Single Inter-ministerial Fund (FUI)
pioneered this trend of competitive collaborative funding, and encourages
public-private R&D partnerships. It corresponds to the competitiveness
clusters’ ('Pôles de compétitivité') funding source. A third phase of this
competitiveness cluster policy was launched in 2013, after an evaluation of the
former ones. Through 34 industrials plans, typically oriented towards R&D
high technology readiness levels projects supporting the development of
export-oriented networks and partnerships, the 2013-2020 programme encourages
clusters to develop new projects and foster the emergence of new products,
processes and services. It should nonetheless be noticed that the 2014 CSR
recommends that France should 'Ensure that resources are focused on the most
effective competitiveness poles and further promote the economic impact of
innovation developed in the poles'.
Launched
in 2010, "Investissements d'avenir" programmes (PIA) is a noticeable
governmental financial effort relying on competitive funding. It includes EUR
21.9 billion dedicated to higher education and research projects, out of which
EUR 17.9 billion are to be allocated on a competitive basis. The fund is meant
to support 10-year initiatives. Part of the money is directly allocated to
finance actions, while the interests yielding from another part of the fund are
also used. From the participant point of view, setting up the necessary
co-ordinations between the project partners was deemed long and painful but was
worth it. Profoundly cooperative behaviours were required to match the
international juries’ expectations, that many of the projects supported are public-private
by nature, that they all relate to local specialisation dynamics. They
correspond to various ambitions and sizes, and are always aimed at supporting
'excellent' partnerships. While all the planned money of Plan 1 is not yet
fully committed, a second ‘Investments for the Future Plan’ was announced on 9
July 2013, EUR 3.65 billion of which are earmarked to fund higher education and
research projects.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are widely used in France.
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and
systematically support the use of core principles of international peer review
is higher than the EU average share of research funders supporting the use of
core principles of international peer review.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is partly allocated on the basis of institutional assessments. Created
in 2007, the Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education (AERES) was
strongly criticised by the community of researchers and therefore replaced in
2013 (ESR law of 22 July 2013) by a new independent administrative authority:
the French High Council on Evaluation of Research and Higher Education ('Haut
Conseil de l'évaluation de la Recherche et de l'Enseignement supérieur'). This
new structure, still being designed, aims to guarantee a homogeneous evaluation
according to international standards for research organisations and looks after
the quality of evaluations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and supports
the institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is lower than
the EU average. However, this result does not consider the allocation
modalities imposed by the MENESR when allocating institutional funding. Indeed,
the resource allocation model for French universities and higher education
organisations performing research takes into account research performance.
Institutional funding allocated to research organisations is accompanied by
annual and multi-annual objectives set in the 'objective and performance
contract' established between the State and a given research organisation. France is currently considering new criteria of research performance for this model.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in France allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in France dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third
Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), France's total of participation is 10.59 % and the country
received 12.32 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 68 per
inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) and 0.21 % of the GERD for the period
2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
The
new (2014) National Research Strategy should reflect the orientations of
‘France Europe 2020’, the strategic Agenda for Innovation, Transfer and
Research adopted in 2013. It will imply a multiannual programming (revised
every five years) under the coordination of the MENESR. Recognizing that, given
the nature and magnitude of the challenges ahead of us, no Member State can efficiently develop solutions alone, this strategy is intended to be
'consistent with the one developed in the framework of the European Union'.
This is the reason why ‘Horizon 2020’ and ‘France Europe 2020’ grand challenges
are, by and large, similar.
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all ongoing
initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases, in particular
Alzheimer's (JPND), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change (FACCE),
Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet
for Healthy Life, Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human
health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a
Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe -
Global Challenges, Local Solutions. France became a member of the 10th Joint
Programming Intiative (JPI) ‘More Years, Better Lives’ in 2014. France coordinates two of these initiatives: JPND and FACCE, the three-year anniversary of the
latter was held in Paris in October 2013.
To
ensure the optimal participation of French research organisations, the Thematic
Alliances (thematic research coordination bodies) were requested to represent France in the JPI governing bodies while informing the ANR. Mirror groups have been set up
to favour French stakeholder involvement in JPIs and ANR participates in all of
them. The MENESR provides support to these mirror groups and coordinates them.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), France was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the
country is already involved in all four existing initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 127 ERA-NETs, of which 38 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in 8 ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which 4 are still running, in areas with high European added value
and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, France has developed a specific policy within its 2009 national research and innovation
strategy. Until 2013, in terms of implementation, it concentrated its
cooperation on Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC countries), Japan and South Korea, while also cooperating with many other Third Countries (United States, Canada, Mexico, South Africa, Mediterranean countries, Africa). France is now
developing a new national strategy (SNR 2014) including an international part
(cf. Action 9 of the strategic agenda for research, technology transfer and
innovation 'France Europe 2020', which calls for a strengthening of the
Euro-Mediterranean cooperation), especially using EU funding in international
cooperation. The country monitors the implementation of its strategy with
indicators like co-publications and incoming mobility (scientific visa).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in France allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU
ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer review
standards is more and more widely supported. The ANR, the main funder for
international cooperation, now follows the so-called 'lead agency' procedure,
which expects funding authorities to accept the results of the international
project evaluation done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project
that are being performed in their respective countries. This process, initiated
with Austria in 2011, was extended to Luxembourg in 2013 and to Germany and Switzerland in 2014 (reciprocal 'lead agency' arrangement with these two latters). An
additional partnership with Romania is expected in 2015. The 'lead agency'
procedure is also used with counterparts from a third country like Brazil (from 2012 onwards) and could be implemented with Mexico (under discussions).
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing joint
programmes are fully applied by the ANR. In fact, the ANR was also established
to improve the influence of the French scientific research community by
developing transnational collaborations with European and international
partners. Their implementation is supported through competitive and
transnational projects, which are supported through two cooperation schemes:
bi- or multi-lateral collaborations joint calls and regular national programmes
with transnational collaborations. In 2011, 194 transnational projects were
funded by the ANR (budget : EUR 57.7 million), which was a 21 % increase
compared to 2010, but in 2012, due both to budget cuts and the reduction of the
number of submitted projects, only 151 transnational projects (budget: EUR 41.9
million) could be funded.
French
funding agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme which
enables small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research
councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither French funding
agencies implements Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables
researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer
ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities
according to original terms and objectives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support the
allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
3.
  RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
France
participates in the following large international research infrastructures: the
European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), The European
Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and Institut Laue-Langevin
(ILL).
In
terms of participating in the development of research infrastructures (RIs)
included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, France participates in the preparatory phase of 41 of them (83 %). It coordinates
seven of them: EURO ARGO, ICOS, ECRIN, ERINHA, MIRRI, ANAEE and SPIRAL2.
In
terms of financial commitments to developing these RIs, France is committed to fund 13 of them: EURO ARGO, IFMIF/EVEDA, BBMRI, ECRIN, ESRF UPGRADE, XFEL, ILL 20/20, FAIR, SPIRAL2, ESSurvey, EATRIC, JHR and PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), France is involved in four of the nine consortia which adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries. France hosts ECRIN-ERIC, EURO-ARGO ERIC and DARIAH ERIC, is a member of BBMRI-ERIC and is
an observer in EATRIS ERIC. France is about to become a member of the
forthcoming ESSneutron ERIC.
In
terms of supporting the development and implementation of RIs, France published its national strategy for research infrastructures in October 2012 and
updated it beginning of 2013. This strategy integrates current and future
international commitments, including Europe. France has also participated in
the update of the European Strategy on Research Infrastructures (ESRI) in the
context of ESFRI and Horizon 2020. At an organisation level, a centralised
system of budgetary control on the operation and construction of facilities of
national interest has been set up. A new governance system was established,
including the presidents of the Thematic Alliances under the guidance of the MENESR.
A high-level steering committee for very large RIs ("Très Grandes
Infrastructures de Recherche", TGIR) is responsible for multiannual
programming and participating in international organisations. It may seek
scientific advice from the High Council of very large infrastructures. France started updating its national RIs strategy in July 2014.
With
RIs expenditures of roughly EUR 1.2 billion per year, France ranks second in Europe, after Germany. Its financial commitment on ESFRI projects stands at
around 127 MEUR/year.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Regarding
access to French RIs, there are no more limitations for Member States
stakeholders. For partners from outside the ERA, access depends on
inter-institutional agreements.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for France in the Researchers Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/France_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 249.086 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in France in 2011. This represents 8.7 researchers per 1000 labour force compared to 7.6 among
the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average
of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 39.2 in France compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 57 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Universities
job vacancies are published on a single website and open to all: the Galaxie
website:
(https://www.galaxie.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/ensup/candidats.html).
Those
interested can register to receive a personalised newsletter that will inform
them of the job offers that match their criteria. In addition, all job
positions in universities (lecturers, professors, PRAG – high school professors
teaching in higher education institutions-, contractual teachers), are
published  by the MENESR that also ensures their publication on  EURAXESS Jobs:
http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/jobs/jvSearch
About
5.000 jobs are published yearly. Beginning in 2014, all ATER job offers (fixed
term contracts for teaching and research positions in universities) are posted
on EURAXESS Jobs. In public research organisations, competition opening
campaigns are published on public research organisations websites (in French
and English for some of them) and on the Légifrance website (legal French
website).
Job
descriptions for fixed-term contracts are available on every public research
organisation website. Some public research organisations (PROs) also publish
their job offers on EURAXESS jobs: INRA, INRIA.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
Since
2008, 38 public higher education and research institutions have committed to
implement the principles of the Charter and Code. The Charter and Code
principles have been promoted since then through the EURAXESS France network,
the Marie-Curie actions and more specifically the COFUND, which is supported by
the Ministry of Higher Education and Research and implemented by public
institutions.
The
implementation of the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) is being
promoted by means of information through a dedicated human resource network,
the ‘GTN RH’ network and seminars of higher education institutes (HEIs) human resources
directors.
By
May 2014, 12 French organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which one had received the 'Human
Resources Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter and Code.
The
ANR 2013 programme planning completes the three-year cycle spanning 2011-2013,
in a context of budget restrictions. The programme planning orientations for
2013 were adopted by ANR’s Governing board on 14 November 2012. The programme
planning framework has been restructured to integrate the general orientations
set by the Minister of Higher Education and Research. The 2013 edition thus
hinges around three components:
•
The non-thematic instruments (Blanc programme, Young Researchers, Post-doctoral
Return, Industrial chairs, etc.);
•
The construction of the ERA and multilateral collaborations (ERA-NETs and
multilateral programs);
•
The thematic programme planning (28 programmes).
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
1.7 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
The
implementation of the new doctoral contract (2009) has significantly improved
the working conditions of young researchers as well as the national R&D
targets. It mainly aims to:
•
          Establish a single contractual framework, providing more protection
and applicable to all public employers;
•
          Integrate for each doctoral trainees a single contract for all
activities directly related to the preparation of his/her PhD, but also
relevant activities such as training;
•
          Establish a single remuneration platform;
•           
Ensure full social security coverage.
This
is a three-year term work contract for doctoral trainees in universities and
public research institutions. It may be extended for a year for professional or
personal reasons, such as maternity leave or sick leave. The doctoral contract
guarantees all the statutory social aspects of a ‘traditional’ employment
contract. In September 2010, 5.320 students registered for their first year of
doctoral training signed a doctoral contract.
The
CIFRE is a partnership between French industry or other employment sectors, a
research laboratory and a doctoral candidate. During a three-year contract with
the company or other private employer, the doctoral trainee benefits from a
high-level of scientific supervision that will help in writing and defending a
PhD dissertation while contributing to research activities. The system is
managed by the ANRT (Association Nationale de la Recherche Technique). CIFRE
fellowships are funded by the French Ministry of Education, Higher Education
and Research. In 2012, 1.350 CIFRE agreements were signed. Over the period
2013-2014, the goal is to reach 1.375 agreements annually.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
 France in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of
another EU-27 Member State was 8.3 % in France compared to 18.4 % among the
Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of
non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 35.4
% in France compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and
an EU average of 24.2 %. 
The
Chairs of Excellence Programme aims to attract the best researchers,
professors, foreign or French, by offering, with the assistance of the host
establishments and organisations, substantial resources to build up a team and
to start an ambitious project with clear anticipated impact. The programme
functions by means of a call for proposals open to all research disciplines.
The 2012 programme proposes three types of chairs:
•
          Long-term Junior; 
•
          Senior Chairs of Excellence;
•
          Short-term Senior Chairs of Excellence.
The
programme 'Industrial Chairs' aims to accompany research projects jointly led
by public research institutions and enterprises. It encourages the integration
of eminent French (expatriated or not) or foreign professors into higher
education and research institutions, or research organisations, and reinforce
the best initiatives developed in French higher education and research. The
programme implies establishing a strong and lasting partnership between the
research institution and enterprises in a high-priority and strategic area for
the parties concerned. The aim is to provide more effective support to
industrial research in all areas. The industrial chairs' objective is firstly
to perform fundamental and applied research, and secondly to ensure training
through high-level research. Researchers from all disciplines can submit a
project on any topic they choose. Joint research structures (structures
communes de recherche), of which there were 214 in early 2014, are partnerships
between tertiary research institutions and businesses. The two partners commit
to pool their resources for a period that is longer than the standard for
research projects or contracts. Generally, it is four to five years and is
rolled over once or twice. The advantages lie not just in the integration of
the two worlds and the pooling of financial resources, but also of
infrastructures and know-how. These structures also facilitate the transfer of
technology.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Regarding
gender equality in public research, significant efforts are being made in France, including through legally binding schemes when deemed necessary. Under the law of
12 March 2012 on 'access to the public positions and the improvement of
conditions on employment of contract staff in the public service, the fight
against discrimination and containing various provisions related to public
service' has provided the legal framework for improving the field of gender equality.
After
some debate, parity was finally imposed in voting procedures for elections in
all governing bodies of universities and other Higher Education Organisations
by the law of 22 July 2013 on Higher Education and Research: 'Each candidate
list is alternately composed of one candidate of each sex'. Parity is also
required by law within the National Council for Higher Education and Research,
in the Board of the new High Council for Evaluation and the new Strategic
Research Council. Moreover, a systematic integration of gender equality was
introduced in the contractual dialogue between the Ministry of Higher Education
and Research, universities and research organisations. Not only does this
feature allow institutions to engage in implementing a comprehensive policy on
gender equality, but it also enables the monitoring and evaluation of
commitments. In addition, the Charter for Equality was signed between the
Ministry of Research and the Conference of Rectors and the Head of Schools of
Engineers at the beginning of 2013. The Irene Joliot-Curie Prize is set to
promote the role of women in research and technology in France.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 88.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
Researchers
working in the public sector (including universities) in France are civil servants. The University Freedoms and Responsibilities Act (2007) allows
universities to provide bonuses and other financial incentives to researchers
and researchers with a teaching position. The law ensures rights for paternity
leave to civil servants, including their position after a break. Parental leave
is considered an effective service in its entirety for a period of 18 months at
most. 
The
"leave for research or thematic conversions" (Congés pour recherches
ou conversions thématiques, CRCT) is a 6-month or one-year break during which
you can decide to focus on research when you work at the university (where you
teach and do research) instead of teaching. In case of maternity leave, women
have a priority if they ask for that kind of break so that they can come back
and do only research, i.e. catching up with research before starting teaching
again. This is therefore in one of the texts regulating human resource policies
on breaks and leaves.
The
Equality Plan includes a measure that is called 'Better integration of equality
in researcher's career'. This measure includes actions such as re-opening the
discussions on the flexible working time, improved integration of professional
and personal life through e.g. teleworking, and development of comparative
tables to analyse promotions. Career advancement and promotion of equality
between women and men is an action line of the Equality Plan.
The
EADS Corporate Foundation and the French Ministry of Higher Education and
Research recognises achievements of women scientists with the Irène
Joliot-Curie Award. France participates in the L’Oréal-UNESCO for Women in
Science program also with French Fellowships.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
Strategic Group on Gender launched by the Ministry of Higher Education and
Research in 2011 published its conclusive report in January 2013. Through 20
recommendations, the document defines the strategic directions for research on
gender issues in France. Based on an impartial evaluation of the current
situation, the report went beyond research and its organisation and touched
upon many systemic dimensions. The recommendations were structured around seven
main themes:
•
Organisation of higher education and research;
•
Education;
•
Training;
•
Research funding;
•
Publication, distribution and reviews;
•
Careers;
•
Parity in institutions of higher education and research.
Some
of these proposals were taken on board by the law of 22 July 2013 on Higher
Education and Research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 5.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 50.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the decree of 30 April 2012 under section 56
of the Law of 12 March 2012 stipulates that there should be at least 40% of
nominations for each gender in senior management functions in 2018. Failure to
progressively comply with this obligation is punishable by a financial penalty
proportional to the deficit of the appointments observed. These objectives
started to be applied by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research to all
supervisory jobs, beyond those listed in the decree (jobs universities and
public institutions) as of 2013. For instance since 2013, there should have
been at least three women in the upper panels of aggregation (procedure of
recruitment of professors in legal, political, economic or management
disciplines).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 28.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 24.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in France is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, a decisive position was stated by the Minister
of Research and Higher Education at the fifth ‘Days of Open Access’ (January
2013): 'Scientific information is a public good that should be available for
all'. As a consequence, the French Government wishes to develop green and gold
access in a balanced and complementary way, while assisting the users that
prefer gold access during the negotiation of licences with publishers. An
additional, original option is promoted, called 'Platinum Road', which is a
hybrid between green and gold access aimed at developing an open access to publishing
that allows authors and readers to access scientific publication without
payment.
Related
to open access to publications, with hundreds of French open access journals,
tens of open disciplinary warehouses and institutional archives, and a handful
of platforms, France appears to be rather active. Nonetheless, in 'Open access
in France: state of the art' (2010), and the latest (August 2013) ScienceMetrix
report entitled 'Proportion of Open Access Peer-Reviewed Papers at the European
and World Levels—2004-2011', France is still below 50 % of open access
articles, i.e. circa 46 %, including 40 % of green and hybrid. New policy
efforts are therefore deemed necessary.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 80.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, in the context of the national action plan supporting open
access, the 'OpenData France Association' was launched in October 2013. It aims
to represent and support local communities in the process of opening up their
public data. France is also a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 12.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 71.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, France pursues the optimisation of its HAL open
archive platform (Online Hyper Articles Platform), which collects institutional
archives. HAL is a national and disciplinary platform, interoperable with local
and international thematic archives as PubMed Central or Arxiv. It receives
nearly 3.000 documents per month and hosts more than 80 archive collections of
scientific institutions. ANR-funded projects have to be integrated in the HAL
open archive platform. A partnership via a Memorandum of Understanding was
created between Research Institutions, universities and ‘Grandes Ecoles’ for
the joint development and management of HAL. 
In
addition, the project 'Bibliothèque scientifique numérique' was set up in 2011
for research and higher education staff to access to scientific resources. A
Steering Group representing all actors in the field of scientific and technical
information was established to ensure coordination and issue recommendations.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, France has been developing a comprehensive knowledge transfer strategy
since 1999, intending to foster open circulation of knowledge between companies
and research organisations. An important milestone was reached in July 2013,
when the new law on Higher Education and Research added the transfer, as along
with dissemination and valorisation, in the mission of Higher Education and
Research Institutions. That reinforced the transfer plan launched at the end of
2012, comprising of 15 specific measures to enhance transfer, being implemented
in 2013-2014. One of the measures is: 'Establishing a new set of indicators for
the monitoring of transfer activities'.
The
French Knowledge Transfer strategy is mainly implemented through the
"Investissements d'avenir" programme, which funds SATT (Sociétés
d’Accéleration du Transfert de Technologies, Private Companies for Accelerating
Technology Transfer), CVT (Consortiums de Valorisation Thématiques) and IRT/ITE
(Instituts de Recherche Technologique, Instituts pour la Transition
Energétique). This comprehensive set of organisations is supposed to form a
continuum of open innovation infrastructures. On the whole, these projects are
designed to develop sustainable public-private partnerships over a 10-year
period. This substantial investment of EUR 3 billion is intended to deeply
modify the French knowledge transfer landscape.
This
is a key operational objective of the National Research Strategy ‘France-Europe
2020’ (May 2013), through 'Action#2” “Enhancing technological research
capabilities'. Other complementary actions are five CEA-TECH platforms, Carnot
3.0, and the new National Research Agency’s calls for proposal named 'LabCom'.
The latter initiative aims to create 100 small and medium-sized enterprise
(SME)-public research joint labs.
Notably
through SATTs and other structures, funding organisations support the
professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to
increase the rate of success of the strategy. 
Strategic
partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in France. Launched in 2006, the 'Instituts Carnot' particularly aims to increase research
partnerships between Research Performing Organisations and companies (network
of 34 Institutes, allocated a budget of EUR 120 million in the framework of
'Investissements d'avenir' programme) and thus contribute to developing
knowledge transfer.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 19.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations
having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
As
regards the implementation of the Digital ERA, France has not set up any
strategy. However, RENATER, the French Research and Education Network, was
launched in 1993 in order to federate telecommunication infrastructures for
research and education. It functions as the National Research and Education
Network (NREN) and provides dedicated specialised Internet service for the
needs of the research and education communities within the country.
Moreover,
in terms of education related to public e-infrastructures, the new law on
research and higher education of 22 July 2013 planned to provide, on a
comprehensive basis, higher education training services with digital resources
and training. As an implementation mode, the Ministry of Higher Education and
Research has launched 'France Université Numérique' (FUN), a MOOC (Massive Open
Online Courses) platform. Since October 2013, high education institutions who
wish to provide their students with training in French and open online
educational resources have benefitted from FUN (part of 'France Europe 2020’).
By bringing together French universities and schools on this project it will
give them international visibility, and enable all public access to various
courses and quality worldwide. FUN courses are designed by university
professors and their international academic partners. Under the coordination of
the Secretary of State for Higher Education and Research, technical inputs come
from INRIA for the deployment of the platform, CINES for the design,
administration and hosting IT infrastructure, and RENATER for infrastructure
networks.
Concerning
digital services, France provides federated services and premium services
(Consultancy, NREN service implementation support).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 80.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is similar to the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
RENATER
is the French member of the eduGAIN service intended to enable a trustworthy
exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation
between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partner federations. It provides national and
international connectivity to more than 1 300 sites of educational and research
institutions in Metropolitan France and in the overseas territories, amounting
to 160 000 researchers and 2.2 million students. It specifically manages, along
with other institutions, the identity federation. Although in France, there are 176 institutions collaborating with the identity federation platform,
there is no top-down policy initiative at national level related to the action.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 67 research performing organisations in France answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 25.8 % of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in France shows that 40.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 48.5 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 10.6 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 91.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 8.1 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.0 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Some
large universities and research organisations did not reply to the survey,
which decreases the representativeness of the results for research performance
organisations.
Regarding
the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project-based funding' it
only reflect the share of project based funding handled by research funding
agencies, and not the share of total research funding allocated as project
based funding in France. The survey did not "captured" institutional
funding, as the latter is mainly provided by the Ministry of National
Education, Higher Education and Research (MENESR), which is not a funding
agency and thus did not responded to the survey. Moreover, among those research
funders which answered the survey, results are strongly influenced by the role
played by the ANR as funder of projects at national level. It must be reminded
that, according to various concordant estimates, between 11% and 12 % of the
total R&D public budget is allocated as project based funding.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Act on higher education and research || 2013 || X || X 
 National Research Agency || 2005 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Law on freedoms and responsibilities of universities (LRU) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Strategic Agenda "France-Europe 2020" (2013) and new National strategy for research (2014) || 2013 || X || X 
 Investment for the Future Plan (PIA) || 2009 ||   ||   
 PRES clusters for research and innovation || 2006 ||   ||   
 (Thematic) Alliances || 2009 ||   ||   
 French-German Agenda 2020 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 National funding agency- ISO 9001 certification for calls programming, selection and funding, monitoring || 2008 ||   ||   
 ANR Lead Agency Procedure || 2011 ||   ||   
 Bilateral agreements between ANR and BMF/DFG (DE), ESRC (UK), NWO (NL), MICINN (ES), FWF(AT) and ANCS (RO) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Research infrastructure roadmap  2012-2020 || 2012 || X ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Recognition of PhD in the public sector (High level public recruitments) || 2013 || X || X 
 Support coordinated personalised information and services to researchers through EURAXESS; EURAXESS France portal || 2012 || X ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Charter for gender equality between Ministry of Research and Conference of rectors and head of schools of engineers || 2013 || X || X 
 Act on higher education and research. Art 13, 37, 50, 53 ||   ||   ||   
 Office for promotion of gender equality and fight against discrimination-Ministry of research ||   ||   ||   
 Action Plan on equality || 2012 || X ||   
 Law of 12 March 2012 on employment in public sector and fight against discrimination || 2012 || X ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Memorandum of Understanding for a coordinated approach on a national level to open archiving of scientific output || 2006 ||   ||   
 HAL - Online Hyper Articles Platform || 2007 ||   ||   
 Action Plan on open access (announced in January 2013) || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 New policy on technology transfer (presented in November 2012) || 2012 || X ||   
 Competitiveness Clusters - Third phase 2013-2018 || 2013 || X || X 
 Carnot Institutes || 2006 ||   ||   
 France Brevets || 2010 ||   ||   
 SATT || 2009 ||   ||   
 Public Investment Bank (BPI) (Creation by regrouping OSEO, BDPME and other organizations) || 2012 || X ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Establishment of new bodies to supervise and coordinate research infrastructures (Directing Committee and High-level Council) || 2012 || X ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN (RENATER in France) || 1993 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
governance of a research and development (R&D) system in Croatia is highly centralised under the authority of the Ministry of Science, Education and
Sports (MSES). It is dominated by public funding primarily based on annual
budget cycles proposed by the National Science Council, the highest advisory
body for the scientific research system. The Agency for Science and Higher
Education (ASHE) is responsible for setting up a national network for quality
assurance.
The
main funding bodies, in addition to the MSES, are the Croatian Science
Foundation (CSF) and the Business Innovation Agency of Croatia (BICRO, recently
renamed to HAMAG-BICRO following a merge of two agencies). A remaining
stakeholder in the research and innovation (R&I) system, the Agency for
Mobility and EU Programs (AMPEU) does not provide funding in order to organise
programmes for lifelong learning and the EU mobility programmes.
The
reorganisation of a more efficient R&D system is the main driver of the
amended Act on Science and Higher Education (15 July 2013), which also
introduced a new model for financing scientific activities from the State
budget via MSES, based on the multi-annual institutional funding for research
programmes. It also launched the scientific centres of excellence (SCE) for the
first time in Croatia.
The
research system in Croatia is dominated by the public R&D sector over a
private sector which is technologically weak and underinvested in the domain of
research and innovation. Universities play a leading role in both research
manpower (80% of total researchers) and performing research activities (54% of
R&D in 2012). The sector of the public research organisations (PRO) consists
basically of 26 public research institutes and around 50 scientific research
units classified as other legal entities.
The
new Strategy for Education, Science and Technology was publicly presented on 16
September 2013 and adopted in January 2014 which substitutes the multi annual
research, development and innovation (RDI) strategy.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Croatia represented EUR 74 per inhabitant
in 2012, less than half the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per
inhabitant was similar (EUR 74). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.6% of
total government expenditures and 0.7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
(Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Croatia was positive, but below the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally,
GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Croatia even when it
regressed at EU28 level.
The
main policy instruments for financing scientific research follows a horizontal
approach to assure the balanced development of the six main fields of science.
Within the given policy context, the majority of public resources are allocated
by the MSES employing four basic instruments: 
•           Institutional
funding (block grant), including salaries for researchers (33%), 
•           Research
grants for operational costs of research projects (competition based program),
“Research Projects” program (10%), 
•           Grants
for new employment positions for young researchers through the competition
driven “Junior Research Program” (31.4%); 
•           Research
supporting programs such as scientific publishing activity, support for
scientific and professional conferences, associations, and research equipment
(8.8%).
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
With
the new Act on Science and Higher Education the allocation of the competition
based research project grants has been transferred from MSES to the CSF, and
assumes a rigid evaluation process that should end up with a small number of
high quality research projects (around 20% of proposals). The total funds
allocated to CSF in 2013 for research projects amounts to around EUR 6.8
million that is only about 40% of the previous year budget. However, the
government plans to increase these funds to EUR 13.5 in 2014.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
international peer review processes for allocating research grants have a long
tradition in Croatia introduced by MSES at the beginning of 2000s. In 2006, the
MSES introduced an international peer-review evaluation system for
research-project applications, and new criteria for project funding, in line
with EU standards, to stimulate and reward excellence, and to encourage the
mainstreaming of resources into larger research programmes.
The
principle funding agency for scientific research, the CSF), is practising an
international peer-review process. The MSES is also using external expertise
for evaluating research projects proposals.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
In
  Croatia the government finances more than 85% of research at public
institutes and 78% of universities, while the business sector finances a small
portion of university research (9.8%) and public institutes (3.4%) (ERAWATCH
2013a).
At
universities, budget funds make around 70 % of total university revenues while
the remainder comes from scholarships and commercial projects. The criteria for
funding tertiary institutions are rather formal and include input from a number
of employees (ERAWATCH 2013a), which is the estimated amount of work required
to implement the approved programs, which correlates with the number of
employees, the estimated workload according to the defined standards in the
higher education institutes (HEIs), and the assessed quality of the programs.
In practice, however, allocations are based on the previous year’s allocations
and there is no consistent mechanism based on the above-mentioned criteria. A
positive new development in the academic year 2012/13 was the introduction of a
pilot scheme for three year funding agreements between the State and public
HEIs. In addition public HEIs receive tuition fee subsidies for their students
according to a recent government decree.
With
the new decision on multi-annual institutional financing of research activities
2013-2015, the MSES provide only a lump sum for multi-annual institutional
funding, the amount of which depends on the institutional performance
indicators. For the first time, these agreements introduced performance indicators,
allowing institutions to receive additional funding if they meet specific
policy objectives. For example, indicators are related to the social dimension
of the HEI through fostering access of under-represented groups and mature
students, or related to a reduction.  Performance-based funding is very limited
and is estimated at around 1 % of overall MSES funding for HEIs.
In
the area of institutional assessment Croatia is applying the European standards
and guidelines based on the Law on Quality Assurance in Science and Higher
Education.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate of institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
In
2014, the main instruments of the cross-border cooperation in Croatia (the IPA programme) were substituted by the Structural and Cohesion funds after Croatia became the 28th EU member in July 2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting transnational cooperation nor measures supporting joint
research agendas.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third
countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), the share of Croatia’s total participation is 0.3 % and the
country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 148
per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013.
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in one of the 10
on-going initiatives - the Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer).
The
number of calls with predefined priorities with other countries in Croatia is 17, nevertheless not all of them are active; budget is not known. When it comes
to calls with predefined priorities with other countries on grand challenges, Croatia is participating in four, namely HERA JRP Cultural Encounters, HERA Joint Research
Programme Call for Proposals, HERA Joint Research Programme Cultural
Encounters, HERA-2009-01 (NETWATCH 2013).
In
Horizon 2020 Croatia is involved in two of the four programmes undertaken by
several Member States (Article 185 initiatives).
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of eight ERA-NETs, of which two are
currently still running. The country also has participated in two ERA-NET Plus
actions - of which one is still running - in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
The
CSF has one bilateral agreement with the German Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
DFG, which includes the popularisation of DFG programmes open for Croatian
researchers. Together with the DFG the Croatian Science Foundation is offering
mobility Instruments; joint research projects and DFG Forschergruppen (Research
Units), Sonderforschungsbereiche (SFBs, Collaborative Research Centers) and DFG
Internationale Graduiertenkollegs (IGKs, International Research Training
Groups). The Research Units are the most flexible funding instrument (Croatian
Science Foundation 2013).
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the
Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,
Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It
comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end
of 2013 six scientific clusters have been launched, for example a cluster in
energy and sustainable research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
Croatia
has rather intensive international research cooperation through bilateral,
multilateral and transnational projects and programmes. Within the bilateral
research projects Croatian institutions signed more than 200 research
agreements while  multilateral projects  include projects with the institutions
like the European Science Foundation (ESF), UNESCO, NATO, UNICEF, the
Alps-Adria Working group, Central European initiative, etc.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is similar to that within
the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Croatia
participates in the four initiatives aimed at regional cooperation which should
contribute to the cross-border interoperability of national programmes and
permit joint financing of innovation, R&D and related actions.  They
include: the South East Europe (SEE) 2020 Strategy adopted on 21 November 2013,
the Western Balkans Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation (WISE) for the
period 2014- 2020, adopted on 25 October, 2013, the EU Strategy for the Danube
Region (EUSDR) which is a macro-regional strategy adopted by the European
Commission in December 2010 and endorsed by the European Council in 2011 and
the EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region which is in progress.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Croatia allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is
higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Croatia
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RIs): the European Space Agency (ESA), the European Fusion Development
Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). The country
contributes 0.07 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen
pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), EMBL, the European Southern Observatory
(ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)
(Eurostat).
In
terms of participating in the development of RIs included in the European
Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country
participates in the preparatory phase of one of them (2 %). So far, Croatia is not committed to developing any of these RIs.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Croatia is involved in one of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed
by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research
infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries,
namely DARIAH ERIC.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of Research
Infrastructures, the MSES adopted in December 2013 the Draft Development Plan
for Scientific Infrastructure to identify priorities for investment in
scientific infrastructure at the national and pan-European level and defines
the criteria for selecting projects. The Plan has undergone the process of
public consolation  early 2014.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Croatia
has not applied a strategic approach and policy objectives in accessing
intergovernmental European infrastructures. Access to the national research
infrastructure within the scientific institutions is organized by the Agency
for Mobility and European Programmes.
However,
in the last few years a broader approach to research infrastructure has emerged
primarily in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector where
development applied a top down approach initialized by the government.
«e-Hrvatska» the institution responsible for ICT infrastructure development in Croatia, implemented two programs relating to research infrastructure, in addition to
Broadband Internet and HitroNet aimed at building centralized network of public
services. Moreover, MSES have been constantly improving the CARNET network
implementing the program of distant learning. MSES, jointly with CARNET and the
Rudjer Bosković Institute launched the «Center for on-line data base»
project ensuring a network approach to commercial databases and providing free
databases for the science and research communities in Croatia (scientists, assistant and students).
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile  for Croatia in the Researchers’ Report 2014.
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 6,847 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Croatia in 2011. This
represents 4.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 110.4 in Croatia compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7
In
2012, 43 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution
(More2 survey, 2012).
Under
the Act on Scientific Activity and Higher Education (Article 40), an
appointment to a research position within public scientific research
organisations must be based on a public competition, published in the Official
Gazette of the Republic of Croatia, on the official Internet website of the
scientific research organisation as well as on the official Internet website
for ERA job vacancies (i.e. the EURAXESS Jobs portal). Since Croatia’s accession to the EU, the deadline for submitting applications is 30 days. Prior
to this, the period was eight days and it was at that time, but no longer is,
legal to restrict recruitment to Croatian candidates.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
implementation of the Charter and Code principles is publicly promoted and
supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports and the Agency for
Mobility and EU Programmes. The promotion of the Charter and Code principles is
also foreseen in the Action Plan for Mobility of Researchers and the Strategy
for Education, Science and Technology. To date, all public research
institutions (including HEIs), the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, the
Croatian Science Foundation and three research organisations from the private
sector have endorsed the Charter and Code (37 altogether) and they are working
on improving their human resources strategy for researchers in accordance with
those principles. The Ministry, together with the Agency for Mobility and EU
Programmes, offers support and information about the implementation process. 
By
May 2014, 18 Croatian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 14 had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter
& Code.
The
Act on Scientific Activity and Higher Education (2013 amendment) includes
measures to widen the selection process for post-doctorates, introduce
promotion on the basis of merit rather than seniority and compulsory retirement
of researchers at the age of 65.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.8 in
2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
2009, the Doctoral Studies Rulebook of the University established a skills
agenda for the development of additional skills as one of the core elements of
doctoral education and initiated specific programmes for transferable skills
development in doctoral education. The Central Office of Doctoral Studies and
Programmes is in charge of providing the necessary tools for implementing a
skills agenda, and supporting PhD candidates in developing transferable skills.
The University of Zagreb initiated a nationwide project in 2013 to provide all
Croatian universities with human resources programmes for sustainable skill
development. The project is called Modernising Doctoral Education through
Implementation of CROQF (Croatian Qualification Framework) and is coordinated
by the University of Zagreb in cooperation with six partners; all Croatian
public universities and three associated partners (Agency for Mobility and EU
Programmes, Croatian Employment Service and Young Scientist Network – MLAZ).
The overarching objective of the project is to enhance the implementation of
the CROQF in the national doctoral education system as well as develop and
modernise doctoral student qualifications during their doctoral studies by
enhancing their professional and personal competences using CROQF standards.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 2.5% in Croatia compared to 4.2% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.4% in Croatia compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2%. 
The
Ministry of Science, Education and Sports has a long-standing policy of
attracting prominent Croatian scientists currently working abroad, and
assisting them in achieving the conditions for carrying out scientific research
careers in Croatia. The new International Fellowship Mobility Programme for
Experienced Researchers in Croatia – NEWFELPRO is a fellowship project
co-financed through the Marie Curie FP7-PEOPLE-2011-COFUND program. Its total
value is EUR 7 million, of which 60% is financed from national sources.
Eighty-three fellowships are available as part of the NEWFELPRO project. There
are specific schemes for outgoing and incoming fellows, including diaspora
Croatians returning to the country. In addition, under the reintegration
fellowship scheme within this programme, a total of nine two-year fellowships
will be awarded with a view to reversing the “brain drain”. 
An
Action Plan for the Mobility of Researchers 2014-2016 will be published in
2014.
One
of the strategic objectives of the NEWFELPRO programme is to provide an impetus
to an effective labour market for researchers in Croatia, connecting industry
and universities, public and private research institutions, and industrial
laboratories, enhancing knowledge transfer and preparing better employment
opportunities for researchers with special attention to innovative processes
for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Croatia
has set up a gender equality strategy in research institutions.
Croatia
has made considerable progress in the area of setting a policy framework for
women's rights and gender equality, enshrined in both legal and strategic
policy documents such as the National Policy for Gender Equality 2011-2015. Croatia has also set an Office for Gender Equality as the main institutional mechanism for
gender equality.
Research
institutions themselves are responsible for monitoring and assessing policy
implementation relating to gender equality.
The
main policies that promote the equal treatment for men and women in society and
science are formulated in the framework documents – the Act on Scientific
Activity and Higher Education (OG 123/03) and  the Labour Act (OG 149/09,
61/11). The regulations that specifically treat gender equality include the
Gender Equality Act (OG 82/08), the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination
(Official Gazette 85/08), and the Act on Maternity and Parental Benefits
(85/2008). These acts provide regulations to put men and women in the same
position regarding working conditions and career progress.  The acts address
also the research sector.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey did not reported support
to gender equality in public research.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
In
  Croatia, the government has set targets for recruiting women in senior
academic positions, i.e. professorial positions. Gender Action plans in Croatia
allow for temporary specific measures in order to reach the national target of
25 % women in leading positions in the public research sector.
Since
2007, the Croatian UNESCO Committee, the Ministry of Culture and L’Oréal Adria
have handed out yearly awards for Women in Science in an effort to raise the
awareness of excellent young female scientists and reward them for their
contribution. The award also encourages female students to pursue a career in
the life sciences.  
In
the event of maternity leave, the Croatian Science Foundation allows candidates
to postpone or pause research covered by the Foundation’s
fellowships/postdoctoral grants.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Funding
agencies do not put in place criteria inspired to gender equality and increased
gender participation in research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated they do not include
specific measures to support gender dimension in research content/programmes. Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the main reference document is the Action
plan Science and Society adopted in December 2012 by the Ministry of Science,
Education and Sports. It proposes to equalise the gender ratio of researchers
in the system, especially in management structures (minimum one third of women
in national councils, regional councils, main committees, scientific and
political bodies, etc.) and stresses the need for gender equality awareness
increase.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 12.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
There
seems to be no gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding
research funding organisations in Croatia.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the Croatian Government strongly encourages
open accessibility to the results of publicly funded research. The Ministry of
Science, Education and Sports supported the the Croatian scientific portal, a
project that marked the beginning of open access in Croatia in 2006. The Portal
provides several informational services which afford open access to all
scientific information resulted from public funding research, as follows: the
Croatian scientific bibliography - CROSBI, the   Croatian scientific journals
portal – HAMSTER and the Who's who in Croatian science.
A
2011 study of Croatian academic libraries (Hebrang-Grgić, 2011) showed
that Croatian scientific community and librarians are aware of the importance
of launching institutional open access (OA) repositories to enlarge optimal
circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge. This is confirmed
by the Croatian Declaration of Open Access which was initiated in October 2012
and has been signed by more than 500 researchers in a couple of months. 
The
Immediate deposit/Optional Access (ID/OA) mandate, as well as the green open
access are not regular practice in Croatia.
In
  Croatia, the majority of journals followed the “golden” open access road in
providing digital journals, including freely available peer-reviewed articles,
and the HRCAK version of an online journal is the only digital version of the
journal. However, some journals have their online version independent from the
HRCAK platform, and editors submit articles in HRCAK as additional copies, so
this part can be considered as “green”, even though it is not submitted by the
author.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
There
seems to be no support to OA among funders which answered the survey. Within the
ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar to that
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
With
regard to open access related to research data the Faculty of Humanities and
Social Sciences participates in the project SERSCIDA – Support for
Establishment of National/Regional Social Sciences Data. SERSCIDA is designed
as a strategic project for supporting the cooperation and exchange of knowledge
between the EU countries associated within the Council of European Social
Sciences Data Archives (CESSDA) and the Western Balkan Countries (WBC) in the
field of social science data archiving. The project addresses the issues of
potentials of usage of information-communication technologies for the benefits
of scientific research and exchange of knowledge as laid down in the call for
proposals topic. The project aims to produce tangible results and improve the
capacities for exchange of knowledge and data collected through research in
social sciences between the European countries and WBC involved (OpenAIRE
2013).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting Open Access to data. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free
of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Institutional
repositories based on open access are established by the four faculties of the University of Zagreb: the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Repository,
Faculty of Organisation and Informatics, School of Medicine Repository and the
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. However all repositories contain
qualifying  works like PhD theses awarded by the faculty except the School of
Medicine, which also contains published material by members of the Medical
School, including peer-reviewed journal articles, published conference papers,
books and book chapters. The three additional institutional repositories are in
preparation: the Rudjer Boskovic Institute (RBI), the University of Zadar and the University of Osijek.
The
most important open data repository is the Croatian Web Archive. Other open
repositories are developed mainly through the e-infrastructures like the
CLARIN, DARIAH, ESS, and since January 2012, SERSCIDA.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Croatia has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. However,
knowledge transfer is at the heart of the Croatian Innovation policy. Croatia's
system of programmes and institutions for knowledge transfer is featured by
many technology transfer centres (in the university cities of Zagreb, Split,
Rijeka, Osijek and Dubrovnik), out of which three are technology transfer
offices (TTOS): the University of Split, the University of Zagreb and the
University of Rijeka, which has grown into the Science and Technology Park
(STeP) of the University of Rijeka.
The
National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020, carried
out by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
provides a list of five strategic pillars for the future development of the
innovation system, focusing, among others, on increasing knowledge flows and
interactions between the industry and the academia and securing a strong
science and technology base and strengthening the capacities of research
institutions for technology transfer. To date, there is no clear legal or
regulatory framework covering the field of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs)
and technology commercialisation in universities but efforts are ongoing to
create a national policy for IPR creation and management at research
institutions. 
Policy
measures related to the intellectual property protection and patents are
reasonably developed in Croatia. These activities are regulated by the Act on
Patents, related Acts and fall under the responsibility of the Croatian State
Intellectual Property Office (CSIPO). However, there are still modest
capabilities regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) which require a
systematic approach to develop the strategy and policy on this matter.
Strategic
partnership between academia and industry are supported by main funding
organisation in Croatian – CSF, which has since 2014 incorporated the Unity
through Knowledge Fund. The latter further encouraged through the annual
approval of around a dozen ‘Young Researchers and Professionals’ projects and
the ‘3C Research in Industry and Academia Grants’, the competitiveness of
national research at an international level and fosters research that creates
new values in the Croatian economy and funds projects that help the development
of research infrastructure in Croatia (Deloitte 2012).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 59.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 58.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and support
national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share is quite
high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share is quite
high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of Digital ERA, the authentication and
authorization infrastructure of the Croatian research and education community
is developed within the AAI@EduHr which today covers the complete Croatian
research and education community. The implemented research and education
network is essential to make digital services possible.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance
to ERA cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Croatia
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. AAI@EduHr is the official
member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable a trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations. AAI@EduHr is also a member of the global
roaming service eduroam which secures, world-wide roaming access service developed
for the international research and education community.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 44 research performing organisations in Croatia answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 102.2% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations
in Croatia shows that 53.5 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 34.9 %
can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 11.6 % of
organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when
the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each
organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’
organisations are 32.1 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 66.5 % for the ‘ERA
limited compliant’ cluster and 1.4 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 The Act amending the Act on Science and Higher Education || 2013 || X || X 
 Decision on Multi-annual Institutional Financing of Research Activities in Public Research Institutes and Universities 2013-2015 || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Unity through Knowledge Fund programme Cross-border grants || 2013 || X || X 
 National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020 (OECD) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Unit through Knowledge Fund - Guidelines and Procedures Croatian Science Foundation - Evaluation Procedure Manual || 2007 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Second Science and Technology Project || 2013 || X || X 
 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (World Bank) || 2012 || X ||   
 The amendments to the Act on Science and Higher Education || 2013 || X || X 
 Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Law on the Croatian Science Foundation || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on Quality Assurance in Science and Higher Education || 2009 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Participation to intergovernmental organisations ||   ||   ||   
 IPA Programme ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Regional Research and Development Strategy for Innovation for the Western Balkans || 2010 ||   ||   
 South East Europe (SEE) 2020 Strategy || 2013 || X || X 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Establishment of the Committee for Scientific Infrastructure and preparation of the National Roadmap for Science Infrastructure || 2013 || X || X 
 Preparation of project pipeline for infrastructure projects for the European Regional Development Fund 2014-2020 || 2012 || X ||   
 Participation in ESFRI || 2010 ||   ||   
 Draft Development Plan for Scientific Infrastructure in the republic of Croatia || 2014 || X || X 
 Draft Development Plan for Scientific Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 EURAXESS portal || 2007 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Marie Sklodowska Curie COFUND_ NEWFELPRO || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementation of the Charter & Code principles in Croatia || 2009 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 National Policy for Gender Equality 2011-2015 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Action plan Science and Society || 2012 || X ||   
 National scholarship programme "For Women in Science" of the L'Oreal Adria and Croatian Commission for UNESCO || 2012 || X ||   
 Ordinance on the Office for Gender Equality || 2012 || X ||   
 The Gender Equality Act || 2008 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Croatian Declaration of Open Access to Scientific Information || 2012 || X ||   
 Hamster - Croatian scientific journals portal || 2006 ||   ||   
 Croatian scientific bibliography - CROSBI || 1996 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Second Science and Technology Project (STP) II || 2013 || X || X 
 BICRO's programmes || 2013 || X || X 
 Science and Innovation Investment Fund || 2009 ||   ||   
 Unit through Knowledge Fund programme "Research in industry and academia grant" || 2007 ||   ||   
 Intellectual property policy for universities and research institutions Biosciences Technology Commercialisation and Incubation Centre – BIOCentre || 2012 || X ||   
 Second Science and Technology Project || 2013 || X || X 
 National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020 || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 The Croatian Academic and Research Network - CARNet || 1991 ||   ||   
 Regulations on the organization of authentication and authorization infrastructure of science and higher education in Croatia- AAI@EduHr || 2008 ||   ||   
 The Croatian National Grid Infrastructure (CRO NGI) || 2007 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
key players of the Hungarian science, technology and innovation (STI) policy
system are the Parliament, specifically the Education, Science, and Research
Committee, the National Development Cabinet, the Ministry of National
Development, the Ministry for National Economy, the Ministry of Human
Resources, the National Innovation Office (NIH), and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA).
The
Parliament is the highest-level political decision-making body for research and
innovation. The National Development Cabinet, established in 2012 and chaired
by the Prime Minister, is a high level political body in the fields of science
and innovation. Notably, it is responsible for EU cofinanced projects and those
with a budget over HUF 1 billion and has the mandate to coordinate governmental
STI policy decisions. The National Science and Innovation Policy Board,
established in 2013 and also chaired by the Prime Minister, provides support
regarding strategic programmes, their long-term financing, and the evaluation
of the effectiveness of the research performing institutions. At policy
implementation level, the National Innovation Office (NIH) is a governmental
body responsible for research, development and technological innovation,
including contributions to strategy-making and programme planning as well as
for international research, development and innovation (RD&I)
collaboration.
The
Ministry for National Economy is responsible for research, innovation and
competitiveness policies. The Ministry for Human Resources is responsible for
the science policy. 
The
MTA has three main objectives: to support and represent various scientific
fields, to distribute scientific results and foster international relations in
the field of sciences. Concretely, it is responsible for contributing to
science policy-making and  its implementation by running the largest network of
research institutes in Hungary. The MTA also allocates funds to its own
research institutes and research units affiliated with universities.
The
National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy (2013-2020), entitled
‘Investment into the Future’ was approved by the government in 2013. The
strategy aims to raise the RD&I investments, and as a result, to mobilise
the Hungarian economy and strengthen its competitiveness. The strategy set the
target, amongst others, to raise the amount of research and development
(R&D) expenditures to 1.8 % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and
increase the number of researchers from 37 000 in 2012 to 50 000 by 2020. The
strategy focuses on three main fields: knowledge creation, knowledge transfer
and knowledge utilisation. The National Research and Development and Innovation
Strategy is accompanied by a two year Action Plan to contribute to its
implementation.
The
draft Science Policy Strategy for 2014-2020 is expected to be approved in the
second half of 2014. It will provide the framework for financing the academic
sector and will renew the acknowledgement and publication of scientific
results. Specifically, the strategy aims to increase the attractiveness of the
research environment, the scientific excellence in all fields, as well as the
talent management programmes to reverse the ‘brain drain.’ 
The
draft Higher Education Strategy, to be adopted in the second half of 2014, will
introduce a performance-based institutional funding model.
According
to the Hungarian Partnership Agreement for the 2014-2020 programme period,
Hungary will allocate 60 % of the total resources available for economic
development purposes and more than EUR 2 billion for developing the knowledge
economy (i.e. support of company R&D and research programmes) from
Structural Funds available for this time period (about EUR 20.5 billion in total).
Funds allocated through the EU Structural Funds' Operational Programmes of the
New Hungary Development Plan (2007- 2013) were managed by the National
Development Agency (NFU) until the end of 2013. From 1 January 2014, managing
authorities in different ministries manage these funds. 
In
terms of RD&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Hungary represented EUR 34 per inhabitant
in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7 % of
total government expenditures and 0.3 % of GDP (Eurostat).
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that, in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
  Hungary was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally,
GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Hungary than the regression
observed in the EU-28.
Tax
incentives are foreseen in the National Research, Development and Innovation
Strategy (2013-2020). The Government is reforming the tax system, in order to
have the most competitive tax system in the region, and create the most
business-friendly environment in Central and Eastern Europe. The plan includes
reducing the corporate tax rate and introducing personal income tax with a
single 16 % flat rate.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
funding is a major mechanism for public support to research, technology,
development and innovation (RTDI) activities in Hungary. The two most important
financial sources providing competitive funding for RD&I activities are the
Research and Technological Innovation Fund (RTIF), and the various operational
programmes of the New Széchenyi Plan co-financed by the EU Structural Funds.
Relevant as well is the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) that provides
financial support to basic research via competitive funding.
According
to informal communication from the Hungarian Government, the share of
competitive funding is about 40 % and it is expected to increase. The following
are examples of new or increased sources of competitive funding: 
•           An
important source for competitive funding are the various operational programmes
of the New Hungary Development Plan 2014-2020, co-funded by the EU Structural
Funds. The most important source for R&D funding is the first priority axis
of the Economic Development Operational Programme (EDOP), which supported 433
new projects in 2012 with EUR 436.2 million (funding decisions); while the
amount of funding actually paid that year was EUR 391.4 million,
•           RTIF
plays a significant role in the R&D funds and strategy. In 2013, the RTIF
published calls for proposals worth EUR 137.4 million, while actual payments
amounted to EUR 79.2 million.
•           The
budget of the Momentum programme of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, which
supports outstanding young researchers, increased by 20 % in 2013 compared to
2011.
•           OTKA
increased its budget by 30 % in 2012 and 2013. An increased budget has come together
with more calls for young researchers to launch research groups.
Simultaneously, OTKA plans to raise the overhead costs, currently15 %, to
support the host institutions.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 82.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
use of international peer review is not widespread. The Hungarian Academy of Science (MTA) increasingly applies this type of evaluation in its funding
programmes.
New
funding schemes use international peer review, like for instance the
‘Start-up_13’ scheme, launched in June 2013 to support the development of the
Hungarian start-up ecosystem and more specifically the development of
technology start-up companies. So far, only four companies have participated in
this scheme. However, the start-up scheme consists of four phases and the
second phase is foreseen to be launched in 2014. The support for building the
start-up ecosystem is part of the planned Operational Programme 2014-2020.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding supported RD&I activities in higher education organisations and
Public research organisations (PROs). There are two main channels for providing
such funding: support for RD&I activities conducted at higher education
institutes (HEIs), and support to the largest research performing organisations
(RPO), the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
The
share of institutional funding is of about 60 %, according to information provided
by the Government. 
The
institutional public funding for RD&I decreased significantly in the past
few years. The allocation of institutional funding to HEIs and RPOs has until
now not been based on performance but on student numbers, disciplines taught,
number of full time professors and number of professors holding scientific
degrees. The draft Higher Education Strategy, to be adopted in 2014, will
introduce a performance-based institutional funding model. Approximately one
third of institutional funding will be based on scientific excellence ((30 %),
even if the criteria are not yet known, whilst the remaining 70 % will still be
allocated based on the number of students.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting institutional assessment for allocating institutional
funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives. The role of RD&I in addressing societal
challenges, and social innovation are generally perceived as not essential in Hungary. Nevertheless, a horizontal priority of the ‘National Research, Development and
Innovation Strategy 2013-2020’ explicitly addresses the global social
challenges and the importance of having excellent research infrastructures
(Ris). In addition, the Science Policy Strategy 2014-2020, not yet approved by
the Government, foresees measures within the framework of smart specialisation
that should address societal challenges and give attention to social
innovation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting transnational cooperation nor funding supporting joint
research agendas.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme, the share of Hungary’s total participation is 1.3 % and the country
received 0.7 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR-27 per
inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4.9 % of
the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011
(last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives (JPIs), Hungary participates in two of the 10
ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer) and Water Challenges for a Changing world.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so-called
Article 185 initiatives), Hungary was involved in three programmes. In Horizon
2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives: AAL2, EMPIR and Eurostars2.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 47 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in ERA-NET Plus
actions, of which are still running, in areas with high European added value
and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Hungary has 36 bilateral agreements, notably with EU members, Israel, and Turkey with the primary
objective to promote mobility and international cooperation, and organise
science and technomgy (S&T) seminars and workshops. Hungary, represented by its National Innovation Office, also has numerous multilateral
agreements, notably with NATO Research and Technology Organisation, COST,
ICGEB, or EMB, amongst others.
Additionally,
the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy has been developed by the Commission
in cooperation with 14 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova,
Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises
science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six
scientific clusters were launched, for example a cluster in energy and
sustainability research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Hungary has not developed a specific policy. In terms of implementation, it concentrates on
cooperations with Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Russian Federation, South-Africa, Thailand, Ukraine, United States, and Vietnam. Hungary monitors the implementation of cooperation programmes
through the S&T attachés in 11 of those countries. The attachés follow the
development of RD&I trends in these countries, facilitate the establishment
of bilateral agreements, encourage the networking of researchers and offer help
to build partnerships.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the
EU ERA-compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is supported by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund and the Hungarian
Economy Development Centre. Two  funders apply the so called ‘lead agency’
procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results of the
evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the
parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries. 
In
2014, Hungary signed a Lead Agency Agreement (ARRS-OTKA), Memorandum of
Understanding with Slovakia. 
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing joint
programmes are not applied by funding agencies in the country. 
Nevertheless
and even though Hungary has not published a National Interoperability Strategy,
the Hungarian e-Public Administration 2010 Strategy gives priority to
interoperability. More specifically, the strategy proposes to update service
processes, enhance the interoperability of back-office systems, and standardise
related data and technology, in order to enable a transition from isolated
services, based on outdated systems, to a system of shared services that build
on sectoral subsystems, which covers the entire public administration domain.
Additionally,
it foresees an ‘Interoperability Comprehensive Programme’, targeting the
establishment of public administration services that are organised around the
needs of citizens and enterprises, the implementation the of the ‘State as
service provider’ model, as well as the improvement of efficiency by
simplifying administration processes and taking advantage of the possibilities
afforded by interoperability.
Funding
agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme which allows
small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils
to be conducted in a different country. 
Funding
agencies do not implement Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables
researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer
ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities
according to original terms and objectives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Hungary allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is
higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Hungary
participates in the following large international RIs: the European Space
Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the European
Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Synchrotron Radiation
Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the
country contributed 1.7 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to developing RIs included in the European Strategy
Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Hungary participated in the
preparatory phase of 12 of them (24 %).
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these RIs, Hungary is committed to fund two of them: XFEL, ELI.
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Hungary is not involved in any of the seven consortia that adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries.
The
national roadmap on RIs is under preparation.
Despite
the existence of a National Research Infrastructure Survey and Roadmap
(NEKIFUT) and the decision to participate in two ESFRI infrastructures (XFEL,
ELI), there is not much funding currently dedicated to RIs. Further support is
foreseen for developing the national strategic research infrastructures and for
  Hungary's participation in ESFRI. Hungary plans to provide more funding and
to participate in at least one more ESFRI project. A proposal, that includes a
prioritisation of the Ris considering the Hungarian and European strategic
relevance in connection to the smart specialisation strategy, will be submitted
for governmental approval in 2014.
The
S3 White Book, published in November 2013, foresees measures to strengthen the
national RIs, although no specific RIs are mentioned in the document.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
  Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) has in place a ‘visiting scholars
programme’ in place, through which prominent foreign scientists are invited to
join the activities of the research institutes of the MTA. 
A
National Research Infrastructure register is in place and provides information
on the main RIs in Hungary. 
With
the aim of facilitating access of foreigners to Hungarian RIs, several
programmes invite outstanding foreign researchers to workshops and other
activities in Hungarian RIs. 
Among
the RIs coordinated by Hungary, access to six of them was funded by the
European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Hungary in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Hungary
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers
There
were 23 019 full time equivalent (FTE)  researchers in Hungary in 2011. This represents 5.4 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 5.3
among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 2.0 in Hungary compared to 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
In
  Hungary, publicly-funded research jobs are published online on the
institutions’ websites and private job sites. Since 1 January 2008, open
recruitment of civil servants has been required by law and institutions are
obliged to publish all public research jobs on a central governmental
recruitment site. Most vacancies are still advertised internally as well.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Hungarian Government actively promotes the implementation of the Charter and
Code principles. Thirteen Hungarian institutions have signed the Charter and
Code. Promotion of the Charter and Code as well as the R&D human resources
strategy is an ongoing process, which involves both the Hungarian authorities
and the Hungarian EURAXESS Office.
By
May 2014, two Hungarian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which none had received the Human
Resources Excellence in Research’ logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter and Code.
Hungarian
higher educational institutions (HEIs)  include career development provisions
for post-doctoral students with the aim of supporting and encouraging them
throughout their profession. For example, the Budapest University of Technology
and Economics and the University of Miskolc offer post-doctoral programmes with
detailed career prospects.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was
0.8 in 2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 1.7.
An
increase in the quality of doctoral training was ensured by several programmes
under the Development Plan (2007-2011) and the New Széchenyi Plan (2011-2014).
These included the Research University Programme and the Hungarian Talent
Programme. In addition, the Act on Higher Education (2005) further supported
the strategic ambition of increasing the quality of doctoral training in
Hungarian institutions. On 1 January 2012, a new Act on Higher Education came
into force. The new Act on Higher Education further supports the strategic
ambition of increasing the quality of doctoral training in Hungarian
institutions by introducing a ranking and classification of HEIs. 
The
new national RDI strategy, ‘Investing in the Future – National Research and
Development, Innovation Strategy 2020’ includes initiatives related to
improving researchers’ employment skills and competencies. The Government
Regulation on National Excellence in Higher Education foresees a set of measures
to enhance the skills and competencies of researchers, to train them to adapt
to the needs and demands of the changing labour market, and to ensure the next
generation of adequate, well-trained R&D human resources.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 6.3 % in Hungary compared to 4.2 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates
as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.7 % in Hungary compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2 %. 
Retaining
talented researchers is a major concern and several programmes provide funding to
that aim. The Momentum and Transmob-HU Programmes are the main programmes
supporting researchers’ inward mobility. For instance, thanks to the Momentum
programme, in 2013, 14 young scholars from among the 104 candidates were able
to set up an independent research team using the total sum of HUF 633.7 million
provided for the first years by the Academy. Consequently, together with the
scholars who have previously received awards, 79 research teams have since the
summer of 2013 been able to conduct research into promising internationally
significant achievements of a total funding of nearly HUF 3 billion. 
The
higher education development priority of the Social Renewal Operational
Programme for the period 2007-2013 (with the measures continuing into 2014) implemented
measures that contribute to improving cooperation between industry and HEIs. In
particular, the measure SROP 4.1.1C aimed at improving sectoral and regional
cooperation at HEIs and SROP 4.2.2 A aimed at supporting high quality research
in dominant fields of research in Hungary. Both measures promoted the
importance of inter-sectoral cooperation.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Hungary
has not set up specific gender provisions or actions in the field of public
research. However, the National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality –
Guidelines and Objectives 2010-2021 aims to increase the proportion of women in
leading positions in both the public and private sectors by one third by the
end of the period. 
At
institutional level, some scientific institutions have put in place programmes
to increase women’s participation in science. For example, the Chemical
Research Centre in the Hungarian Academy of Sciences has a project to increase
the visibility of science careers for women.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey did not indicate support
to gender equality in public research.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA-compliant cluster.
The
country has measures supporting return after parental leave.
The
  Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) introduced in 2012 a framework programme
for equal opportunities that allows female researchers with children under 10
years old to apply for grants over a two-year age limit compared to male
researchers. The Economic Development Operational Programme aims to create work
place environments that ensure equal opportunities for efficient work for
female employees or employees who return to the labour market after a period of
receiving child care fees (GYED) or child care benefits (GYES), and help
integrate these groups into the labour market. The Economic Development
Operational Programme aims to create work place environments that ensure equal
opportunities for efficient work for female employees or employees who return
to the labour market after a period of receiving child care fees (GYED) or
child care benefits (GYES), and help integrate these groups into the labour
market.
In
the 2012 Labour Code the position of women on maternity leave is safeguarded
and the restoration of the same position after maternity leave is guaranteed.
Since
January 2013, a new scheme is in force to foster the employment of
highly-educated, PhD-graduated researchers. It consists of a tax incentive for
the employer. The Hungarian Government also introduced the so-called
‘GYEDextra’ which allows female employees to receive child care (GYED) in
addition to the salary when returning to the labour market. 
It
has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically
support female researchers.
The
L’ORÉAL-UNESCO Hungarian Grant for Women and Science provides financial support
to young female scientists in the field of natural sciences. The financial
allocation is EUR 11 000 per year. The MTA has a special prize for female
researchers, which is awarded annually at the ‘Week of Hungarian Science.’ In
addition, several universities give prizes to female researchers.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 61.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
Hungary
has not integrated the gender dimension in research programmes and has not
dedicated budgets or programmes to women/gender studies.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey did not indicate support
to the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, Hungary has not set up quotas for the
participation of the under-represented gender in decision making bodies of
RPOs. 
Balanced
gender representation within recruitment committees and gender quotas have been
discussed in order to reduce the gap between the representation of men and
women in various professions and bodies, but explicit measures were not
identified.
In
2010, the share of the under-represented gender participating in (a) committees
establishing research priorities and policies and in (b) boards designing /
defining national research priorities and policies was 18 %.
Most
Hungarian universities have developed general and non-exhaustive equality
plans. Some universities have more developed plans, such as the Budapest
University of Technology and Economics. For instance, this university organises
information sessions on engineering and informatics science for high school
girls with the aim of increasing the numbers of female students in the
departments where there are more men than women.
The
National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality – Guidelines and
Objectives 2010-2021 aims to increase the proportion of women in leading
positions in both the public and private sectors by one third by the end of the
period.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 81.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Hungary is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
There
are no specific Hungarian policy measures aimed at enhancing open access (OA)
to publications or data. But some institutions, like the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, apply OA measures.
OA
is receiving growing attention in Hungary. However, three obstacles remain for
the implementation of OA:  the inexistence of a national OA strategy, the
general lack of awareness about copyright and digital issues and the resistance
by researchers to allocate time and effort to the depositing process.
The
President of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) issued an 'Open Access
Mandate', according to which researchers and employees of the MTA should make
their scientific publications open access. 
In
2008 the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) signed the Berlin Declaration
on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, and scientific
publications resulting from an OTKA grant have to be made freely available.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support OA
to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than
within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
There
are no policies or measures in place to support OA to data in Hungary.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support OA
to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU
ERA-compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, the HUNOR (Hungarian Open Repositories) consortium was
established by the libraries of the Hungarian HEIs and the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to advance national open access practices.
The
 Corvinus University, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and University of Debrecen are members of the ‘Confederation of Open Access Repositories’ (COAR)
that promote OA to publications.
Various
online portals, such as the Hungarian National Scientific Bibliography, REAL
(repository of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences' Library) or the Hungarian
Open Access Journals portal, have been put in place to give free access to
publications, journals and information about Hungarian researchers.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Hungary has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy, but the
National Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2020 (RD&I
Strategy) specifically supports efficient knowledge and technology transfer
collaborations. 
Between
2006 and 2012, 15 technology transfer offices (TTOs) were established in major
universities and colleges to support researchers with their patent
applications, licencing and exploitation of research results, as well as with
fundraising activities. The TTOs were set up with EU funds and do not yet have
the capacity to mediate efficiently between academia and business.
In
2013, there were discussions between the National Innovation Office and key
stakeholders in order to formulate a national policy to promote knowledge
transfer. The main outcome of the discussions is a plan to redesign the scheme
used by TTOs at major universities, but not much funding is available for these
offices. 
Only
6 % of Hungarian researchers at HEIs have previously been employed in both the
private and the public sector, which is roughly one third of the EU-27 average,
according to the MORE Report. No specific incentives are provided to increase
this number.
A
2012 regulation introduced mechanisms for the protecting and managing of
intellectual property rights (IPR) of research outputs, ensuring that the
patent rights of institutional and employee inventions created in research
centres belong to these centres. 
The
2013 EU country-specific-recommendation (CSR) emphasised the need ‘to provide
targeted incentives to support innovative enterprises.’ In response to it, Hungary is developing a second set of administrative burden reduction measures for enterprises,
as a follow up of the 2011 ‘Cutting Red Tape Programme’. In addition, the Act
on Public Procurement was amended in 2013 on several points to boost market
competition and ensure greater transparency. 
Funding
organisations do not have specific funding lines dedicated to implementing
knowledge transfer.
The
National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) provides the framework
for developing and operating the research network in Hungary. In concrete
terms, it provides an integrated computer networking infrastructure and, on the
basis of that, a wide range of communication, information, and cooperation
services, leading-edge environment for networking applications, as well as
advanced framework for generating and providing content. Hungary is member of EDUgain through eduId.hu. HUNGARNet is the Hungarian National Research
and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated
to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the
country.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 58.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 56.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support
national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and Private
Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share is quite
high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share is quite
high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. The share is also quite high
in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to implemeting the Digital ERA, Hungary has prepared a National
Strategy and an Action Plan. Hungary has implemented a research and education
network, essential to make digital services possible. HUNGARNet is the
Hungarian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised
Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and
education communities within the country.
The
National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) provides the framework
for the development and operation of the research network in Hungary. In concrete terms, it provides an integrated computer networking infrastructure
and, on the basis of that, a wide range of communication, information, and
cooperation services, leading-edge environment for networking applications, as
well as an advanced framework for content generation and provision.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services,
premium services.
Concerning
digital services, the Commission could not identify support to their provision.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Hungary
was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. Hungary is member of
EDUgain through eduId.hu, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange
of information related to identity, authentication and autorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) partner federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 23 research performing organisations in Hungary answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 14.4 % of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Hungary shows that 22.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’
cluster, 59.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 18.2 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 54.0 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 40.3 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Hungarian smart specialization strategy ||   ||   ||   
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Action Plan of the Innovation Strategy ||   ||   ||   
 Competitive funding : Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) Research and Technological Innovation Fund (KTIA) || 1990 ||   ||   
 Research and development and innovation support scheme ||   ||   ||   
 Start-up 2013 scheme to provide Accredited Technological Incubator titles || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Support to RTDI umbrella projects || 2012 || X ||   
 Support to innovation and technology parks || 2007 ||   ||   
 EEA Financial Mechanism 2009-2014, Norway Grants || 2009 ||   ||   
 "National Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2020" || 2013 || X || X 
 Science Policy Strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Draft Higher Education Strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Support for fundamental and applied research projects to be implemented in international collaboration || 2007 ||   ||   
 Draft Science Policy Strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Visiting scholars programme ||   ||   ||   
 Hungarian Academy of Sciences joined the initiative of Teaming for Excellence || 2013 || X || X 
 "Invitation 13" competition || 2013 || X || X 
 S3 White Book || 2013 || X || X 
 Draft Interoperability Comprehensive Programme || 2014 || X || X 
 The Hungarian e-Public Administration Strategy gives priority to interoperability || 2010 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Participation in ELI (Extreme Light Infrastructure) laser research centre || 2013 || X || X 
 National Research Infrastructure Survey and Roadmap || 2008 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Research Infrastructure register || 2012 || X ||   
 Stipendium Hungaricum || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Momentum programme || 2009 ||   ||   
 "Bolyai Janos" Research Scholarship || 1997 ||   ||   
 “National Excellence Programme - establishment and operation of a domestic system providing support to students and researchers” || 2012 || X ||   
 Attractive careers 
 EURAXESS Hungary - Hungarian Mobility Centre || 2008 ||   ||   
 Hungarian Rectors Conference ||   ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 L’ORÉAL-UNESCO Hungarian Grant for Women and Science || 2003 ||   ||   
 Prize from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) for female researchers ||   ||   ||   
 Scheme to foster the employment of  PhD-graduated researchers, consisting of tax incentives for the employer || 2013 || X || X 
 Child care support 'GYEDextra' || 2013 || X || X 
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 New Labour Code || 2012 || X ||   
 Framework programme for equal opportunities from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) || 2012 || X ||   
  Economic Development Operational Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality – Guidelines and Objectives 2010-2021 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Hungarian National Scientific Bibliography || 2010 ||   ||   
 National Programme for Electronic Information Provision ||   ||   ||   
 REAL - Repository of the Hungarian Academy of Science's Library ||   ||   ||   
 Hungarian Open Access Journals ||   ||   ||   
 Videotorium is a a video/audio sharing portal || 2010 ||   ||   
 Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) in Hungary ||   ||   ||   
 Hungarian Open Repositories consortium (HUNOR) established by libraries ||   ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 University technology transfer offices || 2013 || X || X 
 Regulation on protecting and managing intellectual property || 2012 || X ||   
 Discussions with key stakeholders in order to formulate a national policy to promote knowledge transfer || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) || 1990 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
 Digital ERA - National Strategy and an Action Plan || 2013 || X || X 
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation (R&I) (policy is coordinated by the Department of Jobs,
Enterprise and Innovation.The Department of Education and Skills is responsible
for, inter alia, core funding and overarching policy development, including
research policy, for the higher education sector. Forfás, an agency of the
Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, acts as policy advisory board
for enterprise, trade, science, technology and innovation. 
Key
implementing bodies include Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), Enterprise
Ireland and IDA Ireland, under the aegis of the Department of Jobs, Enterprise
and Innovation; as well as the Higher Education Authority (HEA) and the Irish
Research Council (IRC) under the aegis of the Department of Education and
Skills. The SFI is the national foundation for investment in scientific and
engineering research. The legislation to extend its mandate to allow it to fund
applied as well as oriented basic research in institutions in strategic areas
of opportunity entered into force in November 2013. The IRC focuses on the
cultivation of skills and research expertise to address broad societal needs.
It provides funds across all disciplines and focuses on early stage career
researchers.
Since
March 2012 the National Research Prioritisation Exercise is being implemented
on a cross-Government basis. It prioritises competitive exchequer funding in 14
priority areas and six underpinning platform technologies. The Action Plan for
Jobs, updated annually presents a set of measures to drive job creation, among
which there is a section specifying several actions in the area of R&I. 
The
National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, also adopted in 2012,
establishes a new performance framework for Irish higher education institutions
(HEIs). This is monitored and advanced by way of the Strategic Dialogue process
now in place between the HEA and the HEIs. This is the central means through
which the institutions will develop their future performance in accordance with
national economic and societal objectives.  The imperative to maximise
Ireland’s return on investment in research is explicitly emphasised in the
Higher Education System Performance Framework 2014-16 under System Level
Objective 4: To maintain an open and excellent public research system focused
on the Government’s priority areas and the achievement of other societal
objectives and to maximise research collaborations and knowledge exchange
between and among public and private sector research actors.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Ireland represented EUR 165 per inhabitant
in 2012, slightly below the EU-28 (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded
to 1 % of total government expenditures and 0.5 % of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)(Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Ireland was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. However, in
terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Ireland, measured as
a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved more negatively than the
negative evolution observed in the EU-27. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has
regressed more in Ireland than in EU-28.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
Research Prioritisation: A Framework for Monitoring Public Investment in
Science, Technology and Innovation adopted in 2013 sets out a framework of
metrics and targets for monitoring the impact of public investment in Science,
Technology and Innovation in the context of the research prioritisation
strategy. The framework identifies deliverables and targets for individual
research funding agencies such as SFI, Enterprise Ireland and the Health
Research Board. It specifies that funding agencies should apply where
appropriate, standardised principles for assessing research proposals
(stage-gate, international peer review).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 78.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are extensively used by major
R&D funding agencies such as Science Foundation Ireland and the Higher
Education Authority since 2000.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is partly allocated by HEA based on institutional assessment of
universities, institutes of technology and other designated colleges using
different methods, which depend on the use of the funding. A proportion of
institutional funding (i.e. that part of an academic's work that involves
research) is attributed by the universities to research. The allocation of the
core grant is determined on a formula basis. A further weighting is given for
research students. Five per cent of the core allocation is top-sliced and
allocated on the basis of research criteria (degrees awarded and contract
research income per academic staff). 
The
'National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030', has introduced a new performance
framework within which publicly-funded higher education institutions are being
held accountable to the Government for their performance against defined
national priorities, including specifically System Level Objective 4 regarding
the development of the Irish public research system.
Funding
for public research performing organisations (RPOs) is provided annually on the
basis of negotiations by individual public research organisations with their
parent department (ministry).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is lower than the
EU average. This result may not reflect the situation in Ireland, as the amount
of institutional funding allocated by survey respondents appears to be quite
low.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives. The national research prioritisation strategy is
aligned with the grand challenges identified at European level to be addressed
through optimal transnational co-operation and competition. The Science
Foundation Ireland Agenda 2020 highlights the ambitions of Ireland in terms of
transnational and international cooperation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Ireland allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Ireland
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third
countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), Ireland's total share of participation was 1.7 % and the
country received 1.5 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 115
per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4 %
of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011
(last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period). In December
2013, the Government published the EU Framework Programme for Research and
Innovation (2014-2020): Ireland's Strategy and Target for Participation, which
sets out the Government's commitment to ensure strong participation by Irish
researchers and companies in Horizon 2020, with a target of winning EUR 1.25
billion over the programme period.
Concerning
joint programming initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in nine of the
ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage
and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life,
The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Connecting Climate Knowledge
for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas
and Oceans, Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185
initiatives), the country was involved in four programmes. In Horizon 2020, the
country is involved in all initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 47 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in four ERA-NET Plus
actions, - of which two are still running, in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, the Irish Research
Council forms part of a network of Research Councils across Europe that allows
countries to relate to each other and collaborate on research agendas, and it does
so particularly in the domains of the humanities and social sciences where it
has a particular national mandate. The amended legislation governing Science
Foundation Ireland, enacted in 2013, provides the legal basis for funding
research activities in priority strategic areas, notably with Northern Ireland.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the Irish
Research Council is committed through its membership of Science Europe and the
European Science Foundation to integrating Irish research in European and
international networks of expertise. Besides, the International Strategic
Cooperation Award (ISCA) programme of Science Foundation Ireland supports
research-based collaborations between Ireland’s HEIs and partner organisations
in designated countries, currently Brazil, China, India, and Japan. The United
States-Ireland R&D Partnership Programme, involving collaboration between
the United States (National Science Foundation), Ireland (Science Foundation
Ireland) and Northern Ireland (Invest Northern Ireland and Department for
Employment and Learning), partners scientists and engineers across academia and
industry to address crucial research questions; to foster new and existing
industrial research activity that could make an important contribution to the
respective economies; and to expand educational and research career
opportunities in science and engineering.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Ireland who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Actions
to support the interoperability of Irish programmes with other agencies are
mostly linked with specific bilateral or multilateral activities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 39 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Ireland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is lower than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Ireland
participates in the following large international research infrastructures
(RIs): The European Space Agency (ESA), the European Fusion Development
Agreement (EFDA) and the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). In 2012,
the country contributed 0.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by the EMBL
and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participating in the development of RIs included in the European
Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country
participated in the preparatory phase of eight (16 %) of them. In terms of
financial commitments developing these RIs, Ireland is committed to fund five
of them. They are CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, ESSurvey, EURO ARGO and PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortiums
(ERIC), Ireland has participated since May 2013 in the ESS ERIC, one of the
seven consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission
to facilitate the establishment and operation of Ris of European interest involving
several European countries.
In
terms of support to developing and implementing RIs, their development has been
a key element of national STI strategies. The national roadmap was published in
2007. The Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI) has been a
major funding vehicle to facilitate HEIs to invest in new facilities. The fifth
and current cycle of the programme covering the period 2010-2015 will involve
an estimated investment of EUR 348 million in the higher education sector dealing
with a range of projects including infrastructure. Science Foundation Ireland
launched the last of its most recent funding call for research infrastructures
in 2012. It was influenced by the ESFRI roadmap, as was the PRTLI before it. In
2013, Science Foundation Ireland’s developed Ris as part of its SFI Research
Centres Programme 2013 that provides for funding of associated Ris.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Ireland
endorses the facilitation of trans-national access to infrastructures (in
person and remotely). It also devotes significant resources to helping
researchers to secure right of access to specialist facilities in Europe,
particularly those linked to Ireland’s research priorities and/or relevant to
enterprise goals. The Higher Education Authority published guidelines in 2013
on access to RIs within publicly-funded institutions together with a searchable
database of infrastructures (LIRE - Large Items of Research Infrastructure),
which will be accessible to public and private sector entities.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Ireland in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Ireland_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 15,172 FTE researchers in Ireland in 2011. This represents 7.0 researchers
per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference
group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 105 in Ireland
compared to 72 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 71 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Across
the seven universities, positions for research profiles R2-R4, and many at R1,
are advertised internationally and recruitment is based on the quality of the
candidates. In 2011, the ratio of international academic staff ranged from 26%
to 42% across the universities. In the last quarter of 2014, the seven
universities collaborated in developing a new e-recruitment system
www.universityvacancies.com to provide greater global visibility for university
jobs. Depending on the success of the portal, the system may be rolled out to
other HEIs.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
All
seven Irish universities and some Institutes of Technology (IoTs) have
voluntarily signed up to the EU Charter and Code and thus operate a policy of
open recruitment. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) also applies criteria for
research grant funding based on the Charter and Code.  
By
May 2014, 16 Irish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which five had received the Human
Resources Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter and Code.
The
majority of universities in Ireland have introduced their own research career
structure (e.g. in some cases, the post-doctorate phase is limited to four to
five years in order to ensure the researcher’s progress). Progression to a more
senior role depends on the ability of individuals to compete for work and win
research grants. Permanent academic positions are filled through open
international recruitment. In 2013, the EURAXESS Ireland website developed a
specific landing page for those interested in studying for a PhD in Ireland.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34
was 1.9 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and
an EU average of 1.7.
To
achieve the objective of developing PhD graduates with the skills necessary to
develop and manage their careers across a broad range of employment sectors,
including academia, universities are providing more structured support for
students, incorporating research and generic skills development opportunities.
The seven Irish universities, the Institutes of Technology and the Royal
College of Surgeons in Ireland are committed to strengthening their graduate
research capacity with a concomitant increase in graduate students. The
majority of Irish HEIs have introduced structured PhD frameworks. The key
principle underpinning the Irish structured PhD is a series of measures to
ensure high-quality supervision, support and an ongoing assessment of the
progress of the candidate, with a particular emphasis on providing training and
coursework, at disciplinary level and with a view to developing generic and
transferable skills. 
The
National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 recommends that a consistent
quality framework be developed for Irish PhD education, based on critical mass.
The HEA and Irish Research Council completed the framework in 2014 and will
work with HEIs to ensure greater consolidation and collaboration among HEIs and
funders. The HEA has a particular focus on supporting and enhancing human
capital development, mostly at graduate level through policy drive and support
for a doctoral education system characterised by a structured PhD model.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
MS was 16.9 % in Ireland compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates
as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.5 % in Ireland compared with
16.9% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %. 
There
are no nationalities restrictions associated with applying for either research
funding or research positions in Ireland. As an example, the post-doctoral
fellowships offered by the Irish Research Council are open to researchers of
all nationalities, including those who are resident outside Ireland at the time
of application. 
To
facilitate the inward migration of Third Country researchers, Ireland has
implemented the Hosting Agreement (the Scientific Visa) scheme. By availing
itself of a hosting agreement, researcher entry visas are fast-tracked and
researchers can work in Ireland without recourse to the usual work permit or
Green Card. This scheme also allows the researcher’s immediate family to live
in Ireland for the duration of the contract, and entitles the spouse and
dependents to apply for a work permit allowing greater ease of access to
employment in Ireland. This has most certainly helped in attracting non-EU
researchers to both the public and private sectors. Between the commencement of
the scheme in October 2007 and December 2013, the EURAXESS office processed
nearly 2 200 Hosting Agreements with a total of 42 accredited organisations. 
The
Irish Government places a strong emphasis on industry-academia collaboration.
The national funding agencies for R&I to promote collaboration between
academia and industry. The Research Prioritisation Exercise (ongoing, having
commenced in 2012) involves a significantly enhanced focus on collaborative
research with enterprise and on commercialisation of research by growing the
number of researchers in enterprises and enhancing the flow of researchers
between academia and enterprise. The Irish Research Council (IRC) has secured
Commission co-funding to develop the ELEVATE scheme (2013-2018). This scheme
will allow experienced researchers to spend two years at an enterprise/industry
host laboratory outside Ireland, followed by a return year at an Irish HEI.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Ireland
has extensive and wide-ranging comprehensive employment equality legislation,
i.e. Employment Equality Act, 1998 and Equal Status Act, 2000.  Ireland is
involved in European initiatives targeting institutional transformation in
gender equality and a significant momentum on this front can be observed
nationally with the establishment of a National Network for Gender Equality in
Academic and Research Careers. In November 2012 the ‘Recommendations for
Actions towards Gender Equality in Academic and Research Careers in the Higher
Education Sector’ were published. They formalise a system of national
collaboration to drive forward structural change.
Other
actions address gender equality in research. For example, the Women in
Technology and Science (WITS) network was established in 1990 to actively
promote women’s participation in science and technology; and the Centre for Women
in Science & Engineering Research (WiSER) in Trinity College, Dublin seeks
to develop sustainable practices to ensure that women can compete in research
on an equal basis using their scientific expertise, knowledge and potential.
Also, SFI funded a number of programmes that sought to encourage the entry of
women into science and technology and to facilitate researchers (male and
female) to resume their careers after family care breaks, notably the Principal
Investigators Programme. The Irish Research Council is a partner, along with
Intel and Accenture, in the Women Invent Tomorrow initiative organised by
Silicon Republic, which seeks to champion the role of women in science,
technology, engineering and mathematics.
Ireland
has also set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to
specifically support female researchers.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 45.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
However,
the share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and
support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
funding agencies have launched initiatives to address gender inequality in the
research sector, particularly in terms of the low numbers of female researchers
in science, engineering and technology and the low percentage of female
Principal Investigators. In 2013, Science Foundation Ireland published a set of
new Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) one of which is to increase the
representation of women in science, engineering and technology (SET). Two
targets have been identified in relation to this KPI:  Increased employment of
women in Irish based SET industries — 10 % increase from 2013 baseline; and
2.25 % of SFI award holders by 2020.
In
2013, SFI announced the launch of its Advance Fellowship Award. The aim of this
scheme is to improve the representation and career progression of women in
science, engineering and technology in Ireland.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 45.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
In
terms of inclusion of the gender dimension in research content and/or
programmes, the Irish Research Council published in 2013 its Gender Strategy
and Action Plan in 2013-2020, which, inter alia, requires researchers to
consider whether a sex and/or gender dimension is potentially relevant to their
research content and fully integrate sex/gender analysis where relevant,
thereby ensuring maximum impact, societal benefit and optimising innovation in
Irish research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 7.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 45.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
However,
within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, in 1995 the Irish Government introduced a
requirement for a minimum of 40 % of women and men appointed to all State
boards. However, government targets in relation to the gender composition in
State boards do not apply to universities which are non-governmental
organisations. The Irish Research Council with its Gender Strategy & Action
Plan 2013-2020 aims for balance (at least 40 % of each gender to be
represented) in the membership of all assessment, advisory and management
boards, committees, workshops, focus groups, etc.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 56.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower
than that within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Ireland is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the statement presenting the National
principles for open access policy provides the overall framework in support of
open access to scientific publications. The National Steering Committee on open
access focuses on its operationalisation. It seeks to encourage all publication
repository holders to adhere to the open access principles outlined in the
statement and plans to issue regular statements on its progress in achieving
its goals. The national portal for open access to Irish published research
(RIAN) provides a single point of access to national research publications, and
contains content harvested from the institutional repositories of the seven
universities and Dublin Institute of Technology.
Related
to open access to publications, Ireland has decided to pursue the green open
access route.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 59.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the national principles for open access policy also
address research data.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 79.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, a number of digital repositories have been developed
with public funding including the Digital Repository of Ireland and the Digital
Humanities Observatory. Digital Humanities is central to one of Ireland's 14
national research priority areas: Digital Platforms, Content &
Applications.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, several actions support transferring research outcomes to the market.
Ireland is well advanced in implementing the Commission Recommendation on
knowledge transfer (COM (2008) 1329 final). A joint Enterprise Ireland – IDA
Ireland Technology Centres programme supports 14 industry-led research centres
(Technology Centres), which are undertaking research in specific areas.
Generally, the centres are based in a university with support from partner
universities to deliver on the research needs of enterprise. Through Enterprise
Ireland, the Government organisation responsible for the development and growth
of Irish enterprises in world markets, support is provided for the
commercialisation of academic research and collaboration with industry and
there are a number of other supports to directly assist companies with R&I
activities that will lead to job creation and increased exports. 
With
a view to further driving the commercialisation of publicly-funded research, a
new national Intellectual Property (IP) Protocol is helping to provide industry
with easier access to IP arising from publicly-funded research. A key
initiative linked to the IP Protocol is the new central Technology Transfer
Office (cTTO) located in Enterprise Ireland, which is providing a crucial
interface between industry and the research community and is helping to drive a
world class technology transfer system in Ireland, ensuring it is responsive to
the needs of both academia and enterprise. The cTTO plays a key role in the
Irish innovation system by providing a responsive interface between companies
and the wealth of technology, skills and 'know how' available in the higher
education system. One of the many functions of the new office is providing a
central hub that will enable companies to explore, through a web interface, the
research resources available to them throughout Ireland. 
The
Industrial Development Agency (IDA) Ireland has a key role in seeking to win
high-value R&D investments for Ireland, by promoting collaboration between
industry, academia, government agencies and regulatory authorities. It also
funds in-company R&D. Ireland’s strengthened national research ecosystem
has enhanced IDA’s capacity to attract increased levels of high-value R&D
projects, which qualitatively transform and deepen the roots of key
multinationals. In addition, Science Foundation Ireland launched the SFI
Research Centres Programme 2013. The programme seeks to consolidate research
activities across higher education institutions to create a critical mass of
internationally-leading researchers in strategic areas, which become a key
attraction to industry and lay the foundation for effective and productive
academic and industrial partnerships.
Finally,
the Higher Education System Performance Framework 2014-16 explicitly monitors
and strategically highlights knowledge transfer under System Level Objective
4.  The HEA’s recent publication of institutional profiles also explicitly
draws attention to institutions’ performance in knowledge transfer.  These
profiles will be updated and published on an annual basis.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 84.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Ireland has set up HEANnet,
established in 1983 by the Irish universities with the support of the Higher
Education authority, provides a research and education network, essential to
make digital services possible. HEAnet e-infrastructure services underpin
academic research and education activity in Ireland with approximately 200 000
HEI staff and students relying on the its IT network. Ireland is committed to
providing e-infrastructures particularly for the arts, social sciences and
humanities.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services,
premium services such as security audits.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Ireland
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable a trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) partner federations. HEAnet is the main promoter of the Identity
Federation across the Irish education and research sector. As part of its
Strategic Plan 2014-2017, it is seeking to expand the Edugate service to all
its client institutions.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 13 research performing organisations in Ireland answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 8.5% of the total number of researchers in the country
(total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Ireland shows that 42.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 42.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 14.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 92.5 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 6.4 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.2 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
The
results for the indicator "share of institutional funding allocated based
on institutional assessment and(or evaluation" (section 1.3) may not
reflect the accurate situation in Ireland, as the amount of institutional
funding allocated by survey respondents appears to be quite low.
Also,
it should be mentioned that several organisations did not provided information
for an accurate estimation of the indicator "Share of research personnel
whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time
Equivalents)".
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Strategy for Science,Technology and Innovation 2006 - 2013 || 2006 ||   ||   
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Research Prioritisation: A Framework for Monitoring Public Investment in Science, Technology and Innovation || 2013 || X || X 
 National research and innovation programmes ||   ||   ||   
 Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act || 2003 ||   ||   
 National Research Prioritisation Strategy - Actions Plans for 14 priority areas || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 || 2012 || X ||   
 New Landscape for Higher Education || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020): Ireland's Strategy and Target for Participation || 2013 || X || X 
 Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) (Amendment) Act 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions 
 Science Foundation Ireland: Agenda 2020 - 2013 Review || 2013 || X || X 
 SFI International Strategic Cooperation Award || 2013 || X || X 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 SFI Research Centres Programme 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 National research infrastructure roadmap || 2007 ||   ||   
 Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (fifth cycle) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Guidelines For Access By Researchers To Research Infrastructure Hosted By Higher Education Institutions Or Other Research Bodies In Ireland || 2013 || X || X 
 Draft Consultation Paper on Access by Researchers to Large-Scale Research Infrastructures and Facilities in Ireland || 2012 || X ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Irish EURAXESS Office || 2004 ||   ||   
 Researcher hosting agreement scheme || 2007 ||   ||   
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 Irish Research Council Employment Based Postgraduate Programme (Industrial PhDs and Masters) || 2013 || X || X 
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Irish Research Council's Gender Strategy and Action Plan in 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 SFI Advanced Fellowship Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 Science Foundation Ireland: Agenda 2020 - 2013 Review || 2013 || X || X 
 Employment equality legislative framework ||   ||   ||   
 SFI principal investigator career advancement (PICA) SFI Investigator career advancement (ICA) || 2005 ||   ||   
 Institute Planning Grant Institute Development Award ||   ||   ||   
 Government decision S21590E || 1995 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 National Principles for Open Access Policy Statement || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 SFI Research Centres Programme 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Intellectual Property Protocol || 2012 || X ||   
 Irish Research Council Starter Grants || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 DARIAH consortium ||   ||   ||   
 Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 HEAnet Strategic Plan 2014-2017 || 2013 || X || X 
 Eduroam || 2009 ||   ||   
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry for Education,
Universities and Research (MIUR), which coordinates scientific activities,
supervises the academic system, funds universities and research agencies, and
supports public and private research and technological development. MIUR is
also in charge of preparing the National Research Programme (PNR). The overall
coordination of science and technology (S&T) policy falls under the remit
of the Inter-ministry Committee for Economic Planning (CIPE). MIUR and the
Ministry for Economic Development (MISE) – through its Department of
Development and Social Cohesion (DPS) – jointly coordinate Italy’s
participation in Horizon 2020 and coordinate the smart specialisation strategy.
Other ministries (Health, Agriculture, Defence, etc) manage research funds in
their specific fields, whilst regions are also involved in research and
innovation (R&I). Universities and public research organisations (PROs) are
the core performers of the public research sector. The Council of National
Research (CNR) is the largest research performing organisation (RPO) operating
under the supervision of the MIUR.
Horizon
Italia 2020 (HIT2020), published by MIUR in March 2013, is the key document
outlining Italy’s research and innovation strategy between 2014 and 2020. It
aims at increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of R&I investments and
presents a multiannual research and innovation strategy aligned with the
Europe2020 Strategy and Horizon 2020. HIT2020 will be implemented through the
National Research Programme 2014-2020, which was published in February 2014.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Italy represented EUR 148 per inhabitant
in 2012. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government
expenditures and 0.6 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in
Italy has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU's GBAORD. Finally,
GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Italy than in the EU-28.
According
to the 2014 National Reform Programme, tax incentives for SMEs offering
long-term contracts to researchers and vouchers covering up to 60 % of costs
related to R&D activities will be provided through the National Operational
Programme (PON) Research and Innovation and the PON Enterprise and
Competitiveness. Tax credits on 50 % of R&D expenditure are also available
between 2014 and 2016 for businesses investing in R&D.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Concerning
project-based funding, it is allocated by MIUR through the PRIN (National
Interest Research Programme) and FIRB (Basic Research Investment Fund)
programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 51.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are increasingly used.
International peer review were introduced by Law No134/2012 and further
reinforced by HIT2020, according to which peer review shall be used for all
project-based funding. Peer review with the involvement of foreign experts has
been implemented for the main calls managed by the MUIR (e.g. FIRB, PRIN, Smart
Cities and CLUSTER). According to the 2014 measure by MIUR, peer review will be
adopted for the entire research system.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is now increasingly allocated based on institutional assessment. The
2009 and 2010 laws have reformed the formula for institutional funding for
universities and public research organisations (the ordinary fund for
university funding, FFO, and the ordinary fund for the funding of research
organisations funding, FOE). Approximately 16 % of institutional funding
allocated in 2014 is determined based on institutional assessment (quota
premiale) and linked to the results of the 2013 quality assessment review
carried out by the National Evaluation Agency for the University and Research
Sector (ANVUR). Several of the indicators used for the evaluation by ANVUR are
research-related (i.e. scientific publications, international collaborations
and funds obtained from competitive calls). This share is forecast to increase
to 18 % and 20 % in 2015 and 2016 respectively. This new funding formula is
expected to reward well-performing universities, whilst cuts to the least
performing universities will be gradual. This reform is in line with the 2014
Country Specific Recommendation which highlighted the need to ensure that
public funding better rewards the quality of higher education and research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 35.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is higher
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Several
measures have been adopted to promote Italy’s participation in joint research.
HIT 2020 and the National Research Programme (2014-2020) emphasise the need to
focus R&D efforts on societal challenges, in line with Italy’s smart
specialisation strategy and Horizon 2020. The strategic document by MIUR ‘Atto
di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per
l’anno 2014’ (2014) identifies as a priority the support to the
internationalisation of the research system, including the promotion of ERA and
joint programming with EU MS. The implementation of joint research will be
supported through the programme ‘Support to joint programming’, as announced in
the 2014 National Reform Programme.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Italy allocated to transnationally
coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Italy dedicated
to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than
the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of Italy's participation in the total participation is 10.1 %
and the country received 9.4 % of the total European Commission contribution.
FP7 funding represents EUR 57 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for
the period 2007-2013 and 3.5 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of
GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all of the ten
ongoing initiatives, and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate
Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better
Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world,
Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local
Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 86 ERA-NETs, of which 29 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in five ERA-NET Plus
actions– of which two are still running – in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Italy allocated
to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher than the
EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU
ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards
will be increasingly used in Italy. Law 4/2012 and 134/2012 provide the legal
basis for the domestic recognition of evaluation of international research
projects selected by EU programmes. The Operational procedures 556/2013 support
the recognition of ex-ante and interim international evaluation of projects;
however it does not apply to the recognition of ex-post evaluations. 
Regarding
the interoperability of programmes, Law 4/2012 has introduced several changes
to eligibility definitions and eligibility of costs as well as the
simplification of rules of research projects with a view to align national
practice with EU legislation and practice.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 71.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Italy allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
IT
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, EU.XFEL and ILL.
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 30 of them (61%). The country
coordinates four of them: EMSO, EMBRC, EUROFEL (ex IRUVX-FEL), KM3NeT.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures, Italy is committed to funding 16 of them. They are:
SHARE-ERIC, EMSO, EURO ARGO, LIFEWATCH, IFMIF/EVEDA, ECRIN, INFRAFRONTIER,
INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, EUROFEL (ex IRUVX-FEL), ESSneutron, XFEL, ILL 20/20,
KM3NeT, SKA, and PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Italy hosts CERIC ERIC and participates in five (SHARE ERIC, EATRIS ERIC, BBMRI
ERIC, ECRIN ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC) of the seven consortiums which adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of Research
Infrastructures, the 2014 National Reform Programme reiterates the need to
strengthen and consolidate major infrastructures, notably with regard to ERICs
(European Research Infrastructure Consortia). An update of the national roadmap
of research infrastructures of pan-European interest took place in 2010. The
roadmap includes references to Italy’s participation in the development of the
research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. In addition, HIT2020
provides guidelines for identifying strategic research infrastructures in line
with ESFRI criteria and for the definition of a national plan for research
infrastructures. The Italian strategy focuses by and large on the adoption of
smart specialisation for selecting regions for research infrastructures and on
increased integration at EU level of selected research infrastructures (as opposed
to developing more research infrastructures). In terms of funding, the ordinary
fund for research institutes (FOE) constitutes the main source for financing
research infrastructures on the Italian territory. According to the National
Research Programme 2014-2020, some EUR 185 million per year will be earmarked
as part of the Programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ for the construction and
upgrade of infrastructures.  In HIT2020, the setting up of a specific fund for
financing research infrastructures is foreseen, however it is not clear whether
a timeframe and budget line have been identified. Italy contributes to the
construction of new pan-European RIs with EUR 90 million each year budgeted in
FOE. However, the actual FOE allocations to ESFRI in the last three years have
been lower (approximately Euro 44 million in 2011, Euro 56 million in 2012 and
Euro 69 million in 2013).
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Several
measures supporting researchers’ access to research infrastructures are
foreseen as part of the National Research Programme 2014-2020 and HIT 2020.
According to the National Research Programme 2014-2020 and the 2014 National
Reform Programme, the programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ will facilitate
researchers’ access to infrastructures. HIT2020 also envisages support to
researchers’ mobility across pan-European research infrastructures. Law 35/2012
and Law 134/2012 removed some barriers to researchers’ access to research
infrastructures. Law 35/2012 allows researchers from higher education
institutions (HEIs) and RPOs participating in international projects to leave
their employer for the whole duration of the project or for a maximum period of
five years. However, certain categories of researchers (e.g. fixed-term
researchers, researcher with atypical contracts, researchers employed by PROs
not under MIUR control) are excluded from this provision.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Italy in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Italy
_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 103,424 FTE researchers in Italy in 2011. This represents 4.1 researchers
per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference
group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 23.2 in Italy compared
with 22.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7
In
2012, 31 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Law
240/2010 promotes an open and transparent recruitment system. Although the
level of openness and transparency is not yet fully in line with the principles
of the ‘Charter &Code’, the process is under way and this has been proved
by the constantly growing number of research institutions interested in joining
the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers process. In addition, universities
and public research organisations are requested to publish their research grant
offers on the EURAXESS jobs portal. In 2013 this obligation was also extended
to doctoral (PhD) fellowships.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Charter & Code principles are referred to in several Articles of Law
240/2010. However, they are merely promoted based on an ‘encouragement to
comply’ rather than a mandatory obligation.
By
May 2014, 19 Italian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers, of which seven had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.
The
ratio of R&D investment to GDP is lower than the average in other
countries. The Italian government has introduced fiscal incentives for the
private sector to invest in R&D development. A private company is only able
to fund doctoral study on the basis of an agreement with a university. Law
240/2010 foresees a two-step process for researcher careers: a three-year
fixed-term contract (type A contract) – with the possibility of a two-year
extension, awarded via an open selection process; the researcher can
participate in calls for a type B contract (three-year fixed-term, not
renewable), under a public competitive process. During this triennium, the
researcher can participate in a national evaluation aimed at obtaining the abilitazione
(accreditation – the highest academic qualification). If the researcher is
successful, the university has to enrol him/her in a permanent position.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.6 in
2011 compared with 1.4 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
new Act on Doctoral Training (2013) includes measures aimed at increasing the
quality of doctoral training, and encourages academia-industry collaboration,
but it does not fully cover the Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training.
Doctoral Programmes are assessed and evaluated at national level by the
Ministry of Education, University and Research, on the basis of an evaluation
and accreditation process against a set of criteria set up by ANVUR. The
Italian Government has not adopted a Skills’ Agenda to improve researchers’
employment skills and competencies. However, higher education institutions are
increasingly providing a variety of training and several skills portfolios on
an autonomous basis.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 3.1 % in Italy compared with 4.9 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.2 % in Italy
compared with 5.3 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 24.2 %. 
Although
Italy has transposed the Scientific Visa Directive 71/2005, Universities and
RPOs still face difficulties when recruiting third-country researchers. Some
problems have been partly overcome thanks to a fruitful cooperation established
in 2013 by MIUR, the universities, the research organisations, the Italian
Rectors’ Conference and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The ministry
introduced amendments to the procedures on immigration in December 2013, thus
setting the conditions to facilitate the entry of third-country researchers to
Italy. The Rita Levi Montalcini Programme is a national fellowship programme
managed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research. It promotes the
internationalisation of Italian universities by enabling early-stage
researchers working abroad to carry out research projects at an Italian
university of their choice. Its purpose is to recruit outstanding
post-doctorate researchers working abroad and give them the opportunity to submit
a proposal for a temporary position in conjunction with a proposal for a
research grant. However, the Italian government has not put in place concrete
measures to encourage young researchers to spend some time as a researcher in
another country. A few universities have adopted, on a voluntary basis, an
internal regulation which requires doctoral students to spend at least six
months outside Italy before they sit their final PhD exam. In general, the
outbound/inward mobility ratio is extremely high, to an extent that it has
become a worry for the research authorities.
Law
240/2010 establishes a legal framework for regulating partnerships between
academia and industry. A vast majority of universities and doctoral schools
offer doctoral programmes between academia and industry on the basis of a
memorandum of understanding. Thanks to their autonomy, Italian universities are
free to establish bilateral relations with the business sector. Moreover,
doctoral students are free to sign a high-level apprenticeship contract with an
enterprise. Enterprises and other (private) employers can recruit a PhD student
(under the age of 29) under a fixed-term contract subsidised by the local
(regional) governments. Decree 297/1999 allocates financial contributions to
SMEs where a researcher from a university or a public research centre is
employed by the company for a maximum period of four years, renewable only once
(eight years in total). However, this possibility has rarely been taken up.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Besides
general legislation on gender equality (e.g. Law 215/2012 which introduced the
‘quote rosa’ for selection panels and boards of public companies), no
legislative measures addressing gender equality in research have been adopted.
However, an agreement on gender equality between MIUR and the Dipartimento per
le Pari Opportunità was signed in January 2013. Within the framework of this
agreement, a consultation panel analyses and coordinates activities related to
gender equality in all scientific fields.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 43.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
Regarding
careers for female researchers, the 2011 Government Act provides a specific
budget of Euro 3.5 million for guaranteeing the salary of post-doctoral female
researchers who interrupt their contract during maternity leave.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Regarding
the gender dimension on research content and programmes, the National Research
Programme 2014-2020 includes a specific programme on gender streamlining with
an annual budget of EUR 1 million. Moreover, the provision of medicine, based
on scientific evidence and integrating the gender dimension was included in a
bill in 2013. Several universities have also set up gender oriented academic
courses. Four universities have set up doctorates and courses on gender studies
(the Universities of Bologna, Roma3, Roma La Sapienza and Napoli Federico II),
whilst the University of Bologna is involved in the international masters
course GEMMA on Women's and Gender Studies.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Regarding
gender balance in public research decision making, Law 240/2010 calls for
gender balance on the ‘Board of trustees’ of research institutions; however the
law does not specify targets. The need to ensure that peer review selection
panels are gender balanced was recognised by MIUR in HIT2020.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Italy is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, Italy has recently adopted several legislative
and policy measures to speed up the up-take and implementation of open access.
Law 112/2013 introduces gold and green open access. The law makes it compulsory
for research results resulting from projects funded by 50% or more of public
funding to be in open access. The green road is based on an embargo period of
between 18 and 24 months. Secondary legislation at the level of the MIUR and
HEIs should be adopted in order to ensure the implementation of this regulation.
Several measures have supported the voluntary adoption of open access by
universities and research organisations. The CRUI (conference of deans) set up
a Working Group on Open Access (CRUI Gruppo di lavoro Open Access) in 2006
aimed at disseminating open access in universities. The CRUI Working Group
released guidelines on open access and promoted the inclusion of open access
policies into university statutory regulations. It is reported that 38
universities (out of a total of 97) have introduced open access policies into
their internal regulations. Italy participates in several EU initiatives such
as OpenAIRE, MedOANet, PEER, NECOBELAC and Recode.
Related
to open access to publications, HIT2020 supports the implementation of open
access through Law 112/2013 with a view to achieving the target of 60 % of
publications from public-funded programmes in open access.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 69.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support Open
Access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, funding is provided to universities and research
organisations for the dissemination of research data as part of the Cohesion
Action Plan and the funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions,
'Big Data'. Italy is also a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support Open
Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded
scientific research data systematically is similar to within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
Regarding
repositories, the Cohesion Action Plan launched in 2013 supports the setting up
of infrastructures and open access systems for the dissemination of scientific
publications and research data in the convergence regions. Moreover, MIUR
launched a call in 2013 for strengthening research infrastructures in the
convergence regions. This call earmarked EUR 10 million to develop systems
based on open access for the long-term preservation of research results. At
stakeholder level, the CRUI guidelines also provide recommendations on the
preservation of information and on the promotion of open source software for
the management of open access systems. The platform PLEIADI (Portal for Italian
Electronic Scholarly Literature in Institutional Archives) provides access to
the more than 505.000 documents deposited in Italian academic and research
institutional repositories and open access journals. Regarding research data
repositories, the two Italian supercomputing consortia CASPUR (Consorzia
interuniversitario per le Applicazioni di Supercalcolo Per Università e
Ricerca) and CILEA (Consorzio interuniversitario Lombardo per L’Elaborazione
Automatica) implemented an Italian national platform in 2004 to provide central
access to the digital content deposited in the Italian open archives.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Italy has adopted several legislative measures such as the Stability
Law 2013, which is part of the development package, Pacchetto Sviluppo, D.L.
83/2012, D.L. 145/2013 and L. 9/2014. The National Technology Clusters
programme, which was approved in October 2013, funds projects in line with
Italy’s and Horizon 2020's priorities and involving partnerships between
businesses, universities and public research organisations. According to the
2014 National Reform Programme, a tax credit scheme will be set up for
businesses for the full-time employment of PhD students or university graduates
with a view to enhancing the innovative potential of businesses. The promotion
of knowledge transfer has also been supported through the start-up law and the
reform of doctoral schools. Italy has not yet developed a knowledge transfer
strategy.
Regarding
strategic partnership and the definition of joint collaborative research
agendas between academia and industry, the 2014 National Reform Programme
announces a reinforcement of existing initiatives such as the Contamination
Labs, the programmes for innovative start-ups and university spinoffs.  Through
the 2014 Stability Law, a fund endowed with EUR 5 million for 2014 and 2015 was
established to support companies partnering with public research institutions
and universities. Prior to 2014, Italy had adopted a series of measures, such
as Decree 297/1999, Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education
and the MIUR 2012 guidelines. Decree 297/1999 supports the implementation of
bilateral agreements between academia and the private sector, by providing
support to SMEs employing researchers from universities or public research
organisations. Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education
established a legal framework for regulating partnerships between academia and
industry on the basis of a memorandum of understanding. Based on their
autonomous status, Italian universities are free to establish bilateral
relations with the business sector, such as placement programmes (e.g.
internships) for researchers. MIUR also introduced in November 2012 the
guidelines for managing partnerships between research performing organisations
and HEIs to promote the mobility of research units. Moreover, the agreement
between the Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) and Confindustria, which was
signed in early 2013, aims at promoting researchers' mobility between the CNR and
firms, as well as the development of technology clusters and excellent/top
research activities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 67.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support KT,
OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
With
regards to the implementation of Digital ERA, Italy has adopted several
measures to support public e-infrastructures. Regarding repositories, the
Cohesion Action Plan launched in 2013 supports the setting up of
infrastructures and open access systems for the dissemination of scientific
publications and research data in the convergence regions. The country has implemented
a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services
possible. GARR is the Italian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a
specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the
research and education communities within the country. GARR links universities
and research institutions that provide networking and computing services. Italy
has not set up a strategy for the implementation of Digital ERA.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and
premium services. Policies for cloud computing and scientific software targeted
for the research community are not yet available. However, the 2012 Digital
Agenda (Agenda Digitale) initiative is expected to develop a common platform
for software, content and communication in the education community.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Italy
was not a member of an identity federation in 2011 or 2013. Italy is member of
EDUgain through IDEM, i.e. EDUgain is a service intended to enable the
trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and
authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations. The IDEM
federation was set up in 2009 and is a service of the GARR network. The IDEM
federation includes the majority of universities and research institutions in
Italy and provides access to some digital research services, such as scientific
data, scientific journals and cloud computing resources.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 83 research performing organisations in Italy answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 22.6% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Italy shows that 46.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 39.7 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 14.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 84.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 14.5 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.6 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
In
terms of funders, it should be noted that one major funder, which is
responsible for a significant share of R&D funding, did not reply to the
survey. This means that all indicators related to funders do not fully reflect
the behaviour of Italian funders and should be interpreted with caution. In
terms of research performers, it should be noted that several organisations
which account for an important share of R&D personnel in the country did
not reply to the survey.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National Research Programme (2014-2020) - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X 
 National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 National Operational Programme (PON) Research and Innovation & PON Enterprise and Competitiveness ||   ||   ||   
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Ministry of Education, University and Research competitive calls (FIRB, PRIN, CLUSTER, SMART CITIES) || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on urgent measures for growth of the country (Law 7 August 2012 No 134) - Art. 63 peer review || 2012 || X ||   
 Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X 
 Atto di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per l’anno 2014 || 2014 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to promote quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010 and enacting Legislative decree 19/2012) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Legislative decree 31 December 2009, no. 213, Reorganisation of public research organisations || 2010 ||   ||   
 Quality Evaluation for Research (ANVUR) || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Joint programmes and bilateral agreements ||   ||   ||   
 National Research Programme (2014-2020) - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 ‘Support to joint programming’ Programme || 2014 || X || X 
 Atto di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per l’anno 2014 || 2014 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Operational procedures for evaluation and financing of projects selected in international programmes and initiatives Prot. 556 28/03/2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Law on urgent measures for growth of the country (Law 7 August 2012 n. 134) || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on urgent measures for simplification and growth (Law 4 April 2012 n. 35) || 2012 || X ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 Italian roadmap of Research Infrastructures of Pan European interest || 2010 ||   ||   
 Horizon  2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X 
 Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X 
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 Programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ || 2014 || X || X 
 Attractive careers 
 Government Decree D.lgs 2013/2009 || 2009 ||   ||   
 Law 1/2009 || 2009 ||   ||   
 Regulation on modalities of acknowledgment of doctoral schools and criteria for the establishment of courses by acknowledged schools D.M. 8 February 2013 n.94 || 2013 || X || X 
 Euraxess Italy website || 2004 ||   ||   
 Regional Programmes – envelope dedicated to human resources ||   ||   ||   
 Programme' Rita Levi Montalcini' ||   ||   ||   
 Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivate quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) ||   ||   ||   
 Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivise quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Law on urgent measures for simplification and growth (Law 4 April 2012 n. 35) - Doctoral courses Gran Sasso Science Institute || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on the organization of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivise quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Partnership MIUR and Labour Ministry- Department equal opportunities || 2013 || X || X 
 National Research Programme 2014-2020 - specific programme on gender streamlining || 2014 || X || X 
 Law 240/2010 || 2010 ||   ||   
 2011 Government Act || 2011 ||   ||   
 Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation Law 215/2012 || 2013 || X || X 
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Law 112/2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Horizon Italia 2020 (HIT2020) || 2013 || X || X 
 MIUR 10 million Euros call to develop systems based on open access in the convergence regions   || 2013 || X || X 
 CRUI  WG Open Access || 2006 ||   ||   
 Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Decree Law 69/2013 on urgent measures to relaunch the economy || 2013 || X || X 
 Agreement between Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) e Confindustria || 2013 || X || X 
 Stability Law 2013 part of the Development package D.L. 83/2012 || 2013 || X || X 
 Decree 297/1999 || 1999 ||   ||   
 Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education || 2010 ||   ||   
 D.L. 145/2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 L. 9/2014 || 2014 || X || X 
 Programme 'One thousand and more innovative PhDs' || 2014 || X || X 
 Funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions || 2013 || X || X 
 Project 'Messengers' ||   ||   ||   
 Measures to support public-private cooperation as part of the Stability Law 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Ministerial decree for the exchange of professors and researchers between universities and public research organisations ||   ||   ||   
 National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X 
 Stability Law || 2014 || X || X 
 National Technology Clusters || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions, 'Big Data' || 2013 || X || X 
 Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X 
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Member of eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
In
May 2013, the Lithuanian Prime Minister set up the national Research,
Development and Innovation Strategic Council. This new structure brings
together government, various ministries, academic and research institutions, the
business sector, academia and independent experts. It is an advisory body
aiming at coordinating science, technology and innovation development.
The
other two principal governing bodies shaping research and innovation policy in
Lithuania are the Ministry of Education and Science (ŠMM), responsible for
higher education and science policy, and the Ministry of Economy (ŪM),
which is responsible for innovation policy. The implementation of research and
innovation policy is then mainly performed by a few number of funding agencies:
the Central Project Management Agency (CPVA), the Agency for Science, the
Agency for Science Innovation and Technology (MITA), the Lithuanian Business
Support Agency (LVPA) and the European Social Fund Agency (ESFA). In addition,
the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT) both advises the Parliament (Seimas)
and acts as a funding structure.
The
country has recently adopted some strategic documents that have relevance for
research and innovation. In 2012, the National Progress Programme for Lithuania
for the period 2014-2020, the Concept of the Establishment and Development of
Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centres (Valleys) and the State
Studies and R&D Programme for 2013-2020 were published. In 2013, the
process of preparation for the 2014-2020 programming period accelerated, with
the focus on smart specialisation. Broad research and development (R&D) and
innovation priority areas were approved on October 2013 by a governmental
resolution 'Concerning approval of the priority areas of research and
development and innovation' (smart specialisation). The programme on the
implementation of these priority areas was finally approved on April 2014 by
the Government of the Republic of Lithuania.
In
December 2013, the Lithuanian Government also approved the Lithuanian
Innovation Development Programme 2014-2020 that replaced the previous
Lithuanian Innovation Strategy 2010-2020. The LMT is also preparing the
competitive R&D funding strategy, which is expected to be finalised in
2014. However, the EU Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) will remain the
key funding source for research and innovation (R&I) policy.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Lithuania represented EUR 40 per
inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2012, the total GBAORD
corresponded to 1 % of total government expenditure and 0.36 % of gross
domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).
The
analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic
crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total
GBAORD in Lithuania was higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD.
Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP regressed more in Lithuania than in the
EU-28.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Lithuania
has witnessed an increasing share of government budgetary funding for research
allocated to competitive peer-review-based procedures. The proportion increased
from 12.1 % in 2006 to approximately 50 % in 2012. The major policy shift
occurred in 2009, when the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT) acquired the
functions of a funding agency. All executive agencies usually grant funding to
projects through competitive calls for proposals based on administrative,
quality/benefits and financial assessments of projects. The evaluation follows
a process laid down in proposal guidelines, which are publicly available and
prepared by each agency separately. These guidelines must include information
on evaluation procedures, the peer-review process, the proposed evaluation
supervision, decision-making on funding and others. There were no policy
changes in this area in 2012-2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 47.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
International
peer-review standards are applied in the evaluation on the research proposals
and institutions. The implementation of a peer review is detailed and is
described in the application guides and in the information packages to the
applicants and the strategy documents. All the core principles for a peer
review are applied systematically. However, the LMT attempts, where possible,
to use international peer reviewers on a systemic basis, while other funding
agencies mostly use local peer reviewers and projects evaluators.
The
peer-review process is organised and managed the LMT and based on a methodology
approved in 2010. It is based on research excellence criteria, which are set in
guidelines for evaluating agency projects. The procedures are clear and
transparent with some degree of flexibility, for instance for small calls.
Evaluation criteria are systematically applied. Responsibilities are divided
according to competences: experts evaluate the quality of projects, while
managing authorities take the final decisions on funding. There is no publicly
available data on the extent to which the peer review involves international
scholars. In principle, the participation of international peer reviewers is
not limited. However, in practice, the majority of grant proposals are
submitted in Lithuanian (with a short summary in English), which could act as a
linguistic barrier to the participation of international peer reviewers. There
were no policy changes in this area in 2012-2013.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Lithuania
has witnessed an increasing share of the public budget for research allocated
on a competitive basis. The Government Decision (adopted in 2009 and
subsequently amended in 2010 and 2012) on the method for the allocation of
budgetary appropriations for R&D to public higher education and research
institutions stipulated that a higher share of basic funding should be linked
to research performance. The Decision established that 40 % in 2010 and 50 % in
2011 and subsequent years of basic funding would be allocated to public higher
education institutions (HEIs) and research institutions on the basis of their assessed
results from R&D activities. The remaining 50 % from 2011 is allocated on
the basis of 'normative number of staff", which is approved for each
institution by the decree from the Minister of Education and Science. In total,
in 2013, the competitive funding constituted 33 % of total budgetary
appropriation for research activities (EUR 57 million, sourced only from the
national budget, excluding the EU Structural Funds), which is similar to 2012,
when EUR 20 million, or 34 % of total funding was allocated to competitive
R&D funding.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 25.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and supports
an institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is
lower than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Overall,
since 2010, Lithuania has stepped up efforts to implement joint research
agendas through joint programming initiatives, international programmes and
bilateral programmes. Nevertheless, financial commitments to joint research agendas
are rather limited and national research programmes are only implicitly aligned
with research priorities pursued at the ERA level.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania
dedicated to transnational cooperation is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania dedicated
to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than
the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of the Member States, the Associated Countries and the
third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh
Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Lithuania's total participation was
0.32 % and the country received 0.13 % of the total European Commission
contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 18.7 per inhabitant (the EU average is
EUR 72 per capita) and 3.7 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2012 (the EU average was 2.6 % of GERD for the
programming period until 21 February 2014).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in two of the ten ongoing
initiatives: Cultural heritage and global change and Healthy and productive
seas and oceans.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country has been involved in two programmes
(Eurostars and Bonus). In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in one
of the four existing initiatives (Eurostars2).
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination of national and regional research programmes. The
country participates in six ERA-NETs, which help coordinate the participating
countries’ activities. The country also participates in two ERA-NET plus
actions, which have high European added value and additional EU financial
support to facilitate the joint calls for proposals between national and/or regional
programmes.
Four
bilateral cooperation programmes (with Belarus, France, Ukraine and Belgium -
Wallonia) are running, while one trilateral cooperation programme (with Latvia
and Taiwan) ran for nine years under the LMT. In 2012, the LMT granted financing
to 51 research projects implemented under the cooperation programmes that
totalled EUR 0.3 million. The objectives of these programmes are not explicitly
aligned with broader grand challenges and the funded projects covered a wide
range of research areas. The Lithuanian-Swiss 'Research and Development'
programme is dedicated to implementing joint research or institutional
partnership projects in the field of Environmental Science and Technology,
Health/Life Sciences, and Natural Sciences (EURO 7.3 million for 12 projects
between 2011 and 2016). The Cooperation programme with Slovakia is under
development to start in 2014 or 2015.
In
addition, the Lithuanian Ministry of Economy actively seeks participation in
the international innovation programmes which support international innovation
networks, especially in the Baltic Sea Region. For instance, it has been acting
as an administrating institution of the Green Industry Innovation Programme
since 2012, conducted in cooperation with Norway.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. Lithuania has formal bilateral
research cooperation agreements with China, Belarus, Ukraine Moldova and
Kazakhstan. An agreement with Switzerland in the framework of their support for
‘new’ EU Member States provides funding for scholarships and joint projects. An
agreement with the United States of America (USA) is quite active and
successful: Lithuanian researchers can receive funding for collaborations with
American partners. The USA is considering expanding this to include specific
calls for funding for the American partners participating in this cooperation.
For more than ten years, Lithuania has been involved in a trilateral
cooperation with Latvia and Taiwan, which involves calls for joint research. A
cooperation agreement is in the process of being signed with India. According
to a bilateral governmental agreement signed in 2012, there is also a joint
Lithuanian-Israeli initiative for funding research and innovation projects that
are initiated by business subjects. The calls are implemented according to the
Eureka programme rules and are orientated to both countries' applicants.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania
dedicated to international cooperation with Third Countries is lower than the
EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of the organisations' R&D
budget originating from third countries is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
funding agencies do not implement 'Money follows cooperation', which is a
scheme that allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating
research councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither of the
funding agencies implements 'Money follows researchers', which is a scheme that
enables researchers to move to a research institution in a different country
and transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution, thus continuing
research activities according to the original terms and objectives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and supports
the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
Among
funders who answered the survey, no project-based research funding is allocated
on the basis of peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Lithuania
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
CERN, ITER, ESA and EFDA.
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of six of them (12 %). The
country coordinates none of them.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research Infrastructures
(RIs), Lithuania is committed to fund one of them: European Social Survey
(ESS). The preparation for financial commitments in CLARIN and CESSDA is also
under way.
With
regard to participation in European Research Infrastructure Consortia (ERICs),
Lithuania is involved in one of the nine consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries: ESS ERIC.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of RIs, Lithuania
adopted a national roadmap in 2011; 15 mature or promising projects were
identified. The roadmap also presented the selected list of the European RIs
that are considered to be attractive for some national RIs. However, no
financial commitments for construction and operation of the global, national or
regional RIs have been made in Lithuania so far. Currently, the funds are being
allocated to the five 'Integrated science, studies and business valleys', with
most of the money being invested into macro-regional research infrastructures.
Furthermore, the national roadmap is under review (2014) and is expected to
include six additional projects. The operational programmes that will define
the investment priorities and respective budgets for 2014-2020 will be
finalised in 2014. There are plans to use the 2014-2020 structural and
investment funding for a wider integration into the European RIs, especially
through the ESFRI roadmap.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
Guidelines approved by the Minister of Education and Science in 2012 and those
adopted by the LMT, stipulate the procedures regulating the Lithuanian research
institutions’ involvement in international RIs. Once completed, the five
'Integrated science, studies and business Valleys' should be operating as open
access centres. This implies that, in principle, the access to research
infrastructure should be granted to national and non-national academic and
business establishments. Lithuania is not coordinating any research
infrastructures that have been funded by the European Commission through the
Seventh Framework Programme for Research.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Lithuania in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Lithuania
_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 8.390 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Lithuania in 2011. This
represents 5.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and the EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 1.3 in Lithuania
compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
The
Law on Higher Education and Research (adopted in 2009) establishes the necessary
conditions for an open, transparent, merit-based recruitment of researchers.
Public HEIs and research institutes are legally obliged to: publish information
on vacancies, establish a selection panel, publish selection criteria, provide
an adequate time period for publishing the vacancy (three months), offer the
right of appeal, etc. Job vacancies are published on dedicated websites
(Research Council of Lithuania) and in newspapers, as well as on the EURAXESS
jobs portal.
In
2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct
for the Recruitment of Researchers is not actively promoted as a government
programme. However, both the Rectors’ Conference and the Conference of
Directors of Research Institutes have signed the Charter & Code.
The
Researchers’ Career Programme aims to raise young people’s interest in pursuing
a researchers’ career by offering attractive working conditions and clear
career prospects. The programme supports scientists and researchers in their
scientific activities and, moreover, it promotes the mobility of top-performing
international researchers.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per 1 000 of population aged between 25 and 34
was 0.9 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group
and an EU average of 1.7.
The
Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on procedures for establishing
the right to offer PhD studies stipulates that institutions willing to register
new PhD programmes have to comply with considerably more stringent requirements
in terms of excellence of research, relevance of proposed research programmes,
human and physical resources etc. As a result an increasing number of
Lithuanian institutions establish joint PhD programmes, with the view of
pooling intellectual resources and research infrastructures. Coordination
between universities and research institutes increases the quality of doctoral
training, and fosters openness and transparency in the research system. The
Research Council of Lithuania carries out quality and efficiency assessments of
the doctoral training at least once every three years.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates holding citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 0.2 % in Lithuania, compared with 4.2 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 0.0 % in
Lithuania compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 24.2 %. 
In
principle researchers from EU and non-EU countries can apply for grants in
Lithuania. However, the number of participating foreign researchers remains
limited. Applications for funding schemes need to be submitted in Lithuanian,
posing a language and administrative barrier for third-country nationals
applying for funding schemes. There are several programmes (e.g. Global Grant)
which aim at attracting and retaining EU and third-country national
researchers, where the project proposals have to be submitted in both English
and Lithuanian.
In
order to encourage companies to employ (more) scientists, the Ministry of
Higher Education and Science in 2010 allocated EUR 17.4 million in support of
‘State aid for highly qualified persons’ employment in enterprises for the
period 2010-2013’. Funds were allocated for no more than three years to one
company and per employed person. The financial support covered salaries,
participants’ travel expenses and participation in events. However, the
interest from enterprises was insufficient as of the end of 2011. The Ministry
of Education and Science made EUR 939 348 available for projects implemented in
2012. This activity was managed by the European Social Fund Agency.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Gender
equality in public research in Lithuania was formally endorsed by the
Lithuanian Strategy Ensuring Equal Opportunities for men and women in sciences,
and approved by the Lithuanian Minister of Science and Education in 2008 and
valid until the end of 2013. It provided legal foundations for the introduction
of 'Gender equity and gender mainstreaming' as a horizontal principle in other
strategies and programmes (for example, the Researchers Career Programme). The
main purpose of the strategy was to increase the number of female researchers
in physics and technology, and in high-level positions. In addition, the
strategy called for a review and possible amendments to the law with the aim of
introducing additional finance tools for female scientists.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted the Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within
the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Female
researchers in Lithuania enjoy a number of rights enabling them to interrupt or
to extend their contract in the framework of maternity leave. Researchers
employed under an employment contract have the right to go on maternity leave
for up to three years (social benefits are not paid during the third year of
leave, but the workplace is secured). If the researcher is unemployed, he/she
is eligible for the social allowances and benefits that are available to officially
unemployed persons.
In
2012, in response to a Letter from the Office of Equal Opportunities
Ombudsperson in Lithuania, the LMT provided explanations concerning the
requirements necessary for candidates to attain positions of professors and
researchers, and the establishment of qualification requirements for research
staff members. In the LMT's opinion, the currently effective general legal acts
do not presuppose any infringement of the equal opportunities requirement.
Research and study institutions do not normally include a period of child care
leave into a researcher's term of office. This provision should be foreseen in
employment contracts and the internal regulations of institutions. The LMT is
considering the possibility of reviewing the minimum qualification requirements
by explicitly excluding the period of child care leave when evaluating the
results attained by researchers in a five-year period. In addition, as LMT
grants are associated with specific short-duration programmes, the period of child
care is not included in the funding. In case of three-party agreements
(researcher - managing scientific institution - LMT), if a researcher/project
manager takes maternity leave, she either steps down for good or a specific
time period. In the case of the Global grants programme (two-party agreement),
if a researcher takes maternity leave, a project is cancelled. However, under
the 2011-2013 national project 'Promotion of gender equality in sciences', the
LMT provided grants to researchers after maternity (paternity) leave.
Currently, the LMT is not planning a similar project for the 2014-2020 period.
As
a general rule, funding agencies do not include gender criteria in assessing
proposals for funding. When assigning grants, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
(LMT) does not give any priority regarding a researchers’ gender. In general,
the LMT has not received any complaints about violating gender equality in
funding research activities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotional policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Gender
dimension does not seem to be an issue in research programmes. Nevertheless,
the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences and its partners, including the LMT,
implemented the national project 'Promotion of gender equality in sciences'
(LYMOS, budget EUR 0.6 million) between 2011 and 2013. It issued several
analytical reports and provided recommendations for updating the Strategy on
Equal Opportunities.
For
the time being, there is no systemic approach or legal regulations to promote
gender equality on academic and research committees, boards and governing
bodies, etc. in Lithuania.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey did not indicate any
support to the inclusion of the gender dimension in research
content/programmes.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
For
the time being, there is no systemic approach or legal regulations to promote
gender equality on academic and research committees, boards and governing
bodies, etc. in Lithuania.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 42.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 137.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 34.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of gender-balanced
recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing
organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Lithuania is similar to the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the Law on Higher Education and Research
stipulates that all results obtained from research activities carried out in
state higher educational and research institutions or in education research
institutions using state budget funds must be publicly announced, and that the
results of research conducted in non-state higher education and research
institutions using funds from the state budget shall be publicly announced (on
the Internet or any other way).
However,
the implementation of open access to scientific information remains
problematic. Firstly, institutions and researchers do not have sufficient incentive
to ensure open access to research results. Secondly, public financial support
for the development of open access databases has been fragmented over a number
of relatively uncoordinated projects. Currently, there are at least four public
databases: database on students’ theses and dissertations, the academic
electronic database, the 'Lituanistika' database on Lithuanian research in
humanities and social sciences, the social science data service LiDA,
containing social survey data, historical statistics and data on the Lithuanian
political system. None of them has reached critical mass to become a dominant
source of information on research production in the Lithuanian research system;
they only include a fraction of the research outputs (publications and data)
and do not always provide access to full-text sources contained elsewhere.
At
the agency level, the LMT has been supporting the publication of research
results supports since 2012. The support is targeted at the Lithuanian
researchers to enable them to publish their scientific articles in high-level
scientific journals, as well as independent scientific books. The Agency for
Science, Innovation and Technology (MITA) has been managing the Science and
Research Open Access (MITAP) project (EUR 0.7 million for 2012-2014), which
addresses three main challenges: the public access to the R&D activities
results; the centralised promotion of open access centres’ activity; the
technology transfer organisation and implementation through open access
centres. In 2013, the Ministry of Education and Science nevertheless appointed
the LMT to be responsible for open access development in Lithuania.
Related
to open access to publications, the LMT makes all project summaries and reports
(green access initiative) publicly available. Since 2009, the LMT has been
developing the international scientific database 'Lituanistika' by accumulating
and disseminating verified information on the most current Lithuanian studies.
No other initiatives are planned for the near future.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 65 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support
OA to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the LMT has applied a rule ensuring that since a research
project is finalised in a three-year time period, data on empirical projects
should be provided to a managing research institution and scientific society.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 80.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support
OA to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations making scientific research data systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
As
regards repositories, in 2011, EUR 4.3 million was allocated to Vilnius
University to implement the project 'National open access archive of research
information (MIDAS)'. It seeks to provide infrastructure for the preservation
of and open access to research data. It is planned to integrate it with other
databases. In order to address this issue, the Programme for the Development of
Lithuanian Research and Studies Informational Infrastructure for 2013-2016
(total budget EUR 18 million) was approved. Its target is that 40 % of
publications and at least 10 % of the collected data should be publicly
available, free of charge, by 2016.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, on the basis of the Law on Higher Education and Research adopted on 30
May 2009, Lithuania has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. It fosters
open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. It
is implemented through the updated Concept of the Establishment and Development
of Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centres (Valleys) (adopted in
October 2012 and updated in April 2014). The  Concept provides the basis for
the continuation of investments into five science ‘valleys’ and establishes the
policy mix for fostering research collaboration and the bridges between
academia and industry.
The
strategic partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research
agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in
Lithuania. However, despite a large number of strategic documents and different
measures, there is a lack of consensus on the overall logic of intervention for
fostering open innovation and knowledge transfer. Instead, different strategies
(and their institutional 'owners') focus on separate elements, which imply a
risk of fragmentation. Evidence on the success of implemented measures is
lacking and the results of available evaluation reports point to the remaining
systemic barriers in the field of open innovation and knowledge transfer.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 12.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 67.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support
KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERAcompliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
As
regards the implementation of the Digital ERA, Lithuania has not set up any
strategy. However, as a general rule, publicly funded e-infrastructures are
accessible to researchers from both public and private sectors without major
restrictions. In addition, the 'Lithuanian virtual university programme
2007-2012' has been running since 2007. It provides Lithuanian higher education
and research institutions with access to academic e-library and
distance-learning platforms. A new programme for 2013-2016 was approved in
2012, under the name of the 'Lithuanian higher education and science
institutions' informational infrastructure development programme' (LITMIS).
LITNet is the Lithuanian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a
specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of
research and education communities within the country.
With
regards to digital services, the country provides federated services and
premium services (consultancy, security audits, NREN service implementation
support).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Lithuania
is not a member of eduGAIN.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 48.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 14 research performing organisations in Lithuania answered the 2014
ERA survey, which represents 44.4% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Lithuania shows that 53.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 46.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and n.a. % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 87.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 13.0 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and n.a. % for those organisations where
ERA principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Promotion of High-Level International Scientific Research || 2012 || X ||   
 Decision of the Research Council of Lithuania on methods and procedures governing competitive funding of research. || 2011 ||   ||   
 Support for Research Activities of Scientists and Other Researchers (Global Grant) || 2009 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Government decision on the method for allocation of budgetary appropriations for R&D and artistic activities in public  research and higher education institutions || 2012 || X ||   
 Law on higher education and research || 2012 || X ||   
 Strategies relevant for research and innovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Lituathian contributions to the implementation of joint research agendas || 2010 ||   ||   
 Bilateral and trilateral programmes for research cooperation || 2011 ||   ||   
 EU strategy for Baltic Sea Region / BONUS ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Evaluations in the context of European (joint) programmes ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on participation in international research infrastructures || 2012 || X ||   
 Roadmap for Research Infrastructures of Lithuania || 2011 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Regulation on "Management of Open Access Centres" || 2011 ||   ||   
 Decision of the Research Council of Lithuania on procedures for initiation of participation in international RIS || 2012 || X ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on procedures for establishing the right to offer phd studies || 2011 ||   ||   
 Lithuanian national EURAXESS centres ||   ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 Lithuanian Strategy Ensuring Equal Opportunities for male and female in sciences || 2008 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 LYMOS project ||   ||   ||   
 Promotion of gender equality in sciences || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 National open access archive of research information (MIDAS) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Law on Higher Education and Research || 2009 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Measure for promoting the commercialization process of certain innovative products, technologies or services as well as its entry into the market. || 2012 || X ||   
 Concept of the Establishment and Development of Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centers (Valleys) || 2012 || X ||   
 National Progress Programme for Lithuania for the period 2014-2020 and other strategic documents || 2012 || X ||   
 State Studies and R&D Programme for 2013-2020 || 2012 || X ||   
 Promotion of High-Level International Scientific Research || 2012 || X ||   
 Intellect LT - Joint science and business projects aimed at commercialization of research results || 2013 || X || X 
 “Science and Technology for Innovative Businesses” || 2012 || X ||   
 Direct support measures for public-private cooperation || 2007 ||   ||   
 Programme for Development of Lithuanian Research and Studies Informational Infrastructure 2013-2016 || 2012 || X ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Access to publicly funded e-infrastructures ||   ||   ||   
 Implementation of the project “Creation of Open Access Centres of Information Technologies”, || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementation of the Lithuanian Virtual University Programme for 2007–2012 || 2012 || X ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Higher
Education and Research (MESR) (research)and the Ministry of the Economy (MECO)
(innovation). 
The
MESR provides block funding and is in charge of research performers such as the
University of Luxembourg, the public research institutions Gabriel Lippmann,
Henri Tudor, Santé and CEPS/INSTEAD. The MESR also oversees the National Research
Fund (NRF). Founded in 1999, the NRF oversees funding for public sector
research programmes and administers the national funding programme for
doctorate and post-doctoral studies (Aid for Research Training,AFR). 
The
MECO supports private sector research under the law of 5 June 2009.
Luxinnovation, the National Agency for Innovation and Research, bridges the
public and private sectors, while a governmental Superior Committee for
Research and Innovation (Comité Supérieur de la Recherche et de l’Innovation)
advises the MESR and MECO in order to contribute to greater consistency and
coherence in the research policy mix.
The
country has adopted a national multiannual strategy for research and
innovation. This is demonstrated by such measures as the performance contracts
between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR) and the public
research organisations (PROs), which currently run from 2014-2017 (the
preceding ones covered 2008-2010 and 2011-2013) and the National Research Fund
(NRF) programmes such as CORE, which is also funded from 2014-2017 (and
previously from 2008-2010 and 2011-2013).
Two
draft laws on research ("Fonds Nationale de la Recherche: Loi
Modicative" and " Loi Centres de Recherches Public") have been
sent to Parliament are foreseen to be ratified in 2014. New budgets and the
terms of the new performance contracts 2014-2017, based, among others, on how
well the objectives of the contracts for 2011-2013 were met, were finalised in
May 2014. Luxembourg has a  Country Specific Recommendation: Pursue the
diversification of the structure of the economy, including by fostering private
investment in research and further developing cooperation between public
research and firms.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Luxembourg represented EUR 538 per
inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was
EUR 544. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5 % of total government
expenditures and 0.7 % of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in
Luxembourg has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. GBAORD
as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Luxembourg even when it regressed
at EU28 level.
As
mentioned earlier, two draft laws are currently in the legislative process and
foreseen to be ratified in 2014 aimed at further consolidating and harmonising
the Luxembourg research system. In April 2012, a first draft of the NRF was
submitted. Its principle modifications occur on four different levels, : 
1.
updating of NRF tasks, 
2.
re-determination of the framework of organisations eligible to receive NRF
intervention,
3.
improvement of governance
4.
the introduction of collective subsidies for training research. 
Subsequent
to the first complementary opinion of the State Council, certain governmental
amendments were introduced in October 2013. The second draft law for the
organisation of research centres was submitted in January 2013. There were four
modifications recommended to the 1987 law: Public Research Centre (CRP) status,
CRP missions, administrative and governance bodies of CRP and CRP personnel. In
addition to the principal elements stated above, the current draft law
comprises two major complementary elements, the merger of CRP-Gabriel Lippmann
and CRP-Henri Tudor and the incorporation of the Integrated BioBank of Luxembourg
into the CRP–Santé.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
performance contracts 2014-2017 also include funding commitments and targets
for external funding, in particular for competitive funding. 
Evaluations
of PROs by international experts are also mandated in performance contracts.
The results of the evaluations of the public research centres are published on
the MESR website and, for the university, on its website. It should be noted
that the entire national research system was evaluated by the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2006 and the NRF undertook a
Foresight Study in 2006-2007.  The government ordered a new study by the OECD
in 2013 on the national research and innovation system with the objective of
analysing the level and degree of quality of the implementation of
recommendations issued during the 2006 evaluation. The objective of this study
is to draw up an independent and comparative report on the strengths and
weaknesses of the national research and innovation system at present, and to
formulate specific recommendations to improve and optimise the national
research and innovation policy and the tools to be used in the area, based on
good practices identified in other OECD nations. It was also to identify good
practices in the Luxembourg context that could serve as a reference to other
OECD countries.
The
MESR considers its performance contracts with Luxembourg’s PROs as integral
policy documents. Performance contracts mandate increasing amounts of
competitive, project-based funding to be obtained by Luxembourg’s PROs as
prerequisites for government funding. Regular evaluations of the public
research centres are required; the university is also evaluated on a regular
basis by the law of 12 August 2003. In addition, performance contracts include
'research performance' targets such as the number of publications, patents,
spin-offs and doctoral students trained, as well as purely financial
benchmarks. Evaluations of how well PROs have met the criteria established in
their performance contracts are done annually and at the end of each period and
form the basis of performance contract targets for the forthcoming period.
All
programmes funded through the NRF operate with a system of calls. The ATTRACT,
CORE, INTER and OPEN programmes have annual calls, while calls for the PEARL
programme are open all year. The new National Centre of Excellence (NCER) also
issues calls. Calls are published on the NRF website and are also broadcast via
the eNewsletter of the Luxembourg Portal for Innovation and Research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are an inherent part of the
proposal evaluation process of proposals for the NRF CORE programme. All of
these factors form the basis of an effective base policy mix of Luxembourg’s
national research system (NRS).
Funding
programmes of the NRF require proposals be subject to review by independent,
international experts and adhere to the core principles of international peer
review. The ATTRACT programme is a typical example. Each proposal is initially
evaluated by three independent, international expert reviewers. Based on these
evaluations, up to five candidates are invited to present their proposal to a
panel, which also includes one of the independent international experts. The
final decision is made by the NRF’s Board of Administration and Scientific
Council, members of the latter of which are also members of respected
international organisations.
Private
sector research funding essentially falls under the purview of the MECO under
the law of 5 June 2009. Funding proposals under this scheme are not subject to
international peer review and are confidential.
In
terms of the evaluation of research actors receiving public sector funding,
mandatory evaluations are required by performance contracts and the university
under the law of 12 August 2003. The results of the evaluations will be
published. The NRF requirement that proposals be submitted in English is not
considered to be an impediment for either resident or foreign-based
researchers. The private sector research funding under the law of 5 June 2009
is altogether less transparent.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is allocated based on institutional assessment. 
Performance
contracts provide the institutions with quite large autonomy in defining and
implementing a four year research development strategy. They include funding
commitments and targets for external funding as well as provisions for human
resources development for researchers. Increasing amounts of competitive and
project-based funding as well as mandatory regular evaluations of the public
research centres (or their departments) by international peer review are
mandated by performance contracts. The University of Luxembourg is also
evaluated on a regular basis under the law of 12 August 2003. The results of
evaluations of the public research centres are published on the MESR website
and, for the university, on its website. All evaluations are conducted through
a peer review by independent, international experts.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey do not
allocate institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Luxembourg allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Luxembourg
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
higher than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of participation of Luxembourg in total participation is 0.2 %
and the country received 0.1 % of total European Commission (EC) contribution.
FP7 funding represents EUR 74 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR 72 per capita)
for the period 2007-2013 and 1.3 % of the gross domestic expenditures (GERD) on
R&D for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 %
of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in one of the ten
ongoing initiatives. This initiative is Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer).
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the existing four
initiatives: EDCTP, AAL and Eurostars.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 15 ERA-NETs, of which five are
currently still running. The country has also participated in three ERA-NET
Plus actions, of which one is still running, in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with research organisations in EU Member States and/or
Associated Countries, the NRF has nine bilateral agreements notably with the
Belgian Science Policy Service (BELSPO), the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO)
the German Research Foundation (DFG), the National Centre for Scientific
Research in France (CNRS), the French National Research Agency (ANR), the Swiss
National Science Foundation (SNF) the National Centre for Research and
Development of Poland (NCBIR), the Research Councils of the United Kingdom
(RCUK) and the Austrian Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung
(FWF).
Luxemburg
also participates in:
EUROCORES
Scheme of the European Science Foundation (ESF)
European
Collaborative Research Projects ERCP (ESF)
Materials
World Network (MWN) NSF MATERIALS
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. However, the NRF’s INTER programme
funds Luxembourg researcher participation in international projects. The aim of
the programme is to promote international scientific cooperation, to create
synergies between research centres within and outside Luxembourg, to achieve a
critical mass in certain fields, to take a better approach to the resolution of
certain transnational issues, and to increase the visibility and
competitiveness of research in Luxembourg. It should be noted that project
funding is for Luxembourg researchers working in Luxembourg to go abroad or for
researchers from elsewhere to come to Luxembourg
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the organisations did not receive
funding from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Luxembourg
is one of the few countries implementing the Lead Agency system, which allows a
full mutual recognition of the evaluation process between research funding
organisations. 
As
Luxembourg does not possess a critical mass of researchers, it actively
encourages research collaboration between researchers in Luxembourg and abroad.
Grants are fully open to non-residents in Luxembourg. The selection process is
neither related to the country of residence of the researcher nor to the
researcher’s nationality.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
have measures to support the allocation of project-based funding on
peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.
Research
funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Luxembourg
participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA
and EMBL.
Luxembourg
participates in two infrastructures, DARIAH and SHARE, which were selected by
the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). Although the process
on national ESFI roadmap is not formalised, the country has launched a national
consultation process. The government is currently analysing opportunities for
strategic participation in other infrastructures on the ESFRI roadmap in
conjunction with research institutions and users of research, especially in the
bio-medical domain.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
Luxembourg is not involved.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Not
applicable
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Luxembourg in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Luxembourg_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 2 636 FTE researchers in Luxembourg in 2011. This represents 11.2
researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union
reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 120.3 in Luxembourg
compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 72 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
University of Luxembourg and the public research centres are in the process of
developing a human resources policy, including recruitment measures, under the
provisions of the ‘Charter & Code’. The EURAXESS portal is regularly used
by the University of Luxembourg, public research institutions and by an
increasing number of private institutions for job announcements. English is the
preferred language for non-administrative posts. Finally, there are no legal,
institutional or cultural barriers (at national/regional/local level) to the
openness and transparency of the national recruitment system. 
The
proposal for a new Law on Public Research Institutions calls on the Boards of
the Centres to define clear recruitment procedures in the internal regulations.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
University of Luxembourg, four public sector research institutions and the
National Research Fund (FNR) have endorsed the ‘Charter & Code’ and are
involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers. The AFR
Grant Schemes are also in line with the principles advocated in the Charter &
Code. Under the future new law on public research institutions, the
implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ will become mandatory. By May 2014,
two organisations had received the HR Excellence in Research logo for their
progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
All
new positions at the University of Luxembourg are open to external researchers.
Luxembourg institutions do not actively promote career development provisions
with the exception of the AFR grant selection criteria at post-doctoral level
which include career prospects. Neither the University of Luxembourg nor the
public sector research centres provide tenure track possibilities. The only
exception is the ATTRACT scheme of the FNR: in order to attract excellent
researchers to Luxembourg, the FNR has made it mandatory for applicants to
receive a guarantee from their institutions based on an objective performance
review. This paves the way to them receiving an unlimited contract at the end
of their grant with the prospect of advancing to the corresponding level of
seniority, with the same rights and obligations as the other permanent
researchers in the institution.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.8 in
2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
currently proposed reform of the FNR (Fonds National de la Recherche) law
foresees the implementation of a new funding instrument to allocate collective
AFR (Aides à la Formation-Recherche) PhD-grants to Luxembourg public research
units, based on criteria such as scientific excellence, and the quality of
doctoral training and supervision. The FNR is developing in parallel a quality
framework for doctoral training, which defines a basic set of requirements for
the management, quality and academic standards of the training of FNR-funded
PhDs across all Luxembourg institutions. The implementation of this quality
framework will be part of the assessment exercise for the new AFR collective
grant scheme (foreseen in 2015). 
The
University of Luxembourg together with the public sector research centres have,
when appropriate, set up doctoral schools for PhD candidates in order to
improve researchers’ employment skills and competencies. The proposed new AFR
collective grant scheme will support high-quality doctoral training programmes
offering scientific and non-scientific skills. The FNR offers training in
project management to starting AFR beneficiaries and career orientation
training, 'From Learning to Earning' to AFR candidates in the end phase of
their PhD or post-doctoral. Moreover, the University of Luxembourg has a set of
training courses to promote researchers’ transferable skills, including
communication, writing, intellectual property rights (IPR) and
entrepreneurship, etc.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 67.9 % in Luxembourg compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.3 % in
Luxembourg compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and
an EU average of 24.2 %. 
The
FNR’s Inter Mobility Scheme supports the mobility of researchers based in
Luxembourg to move abroad as well as the mobility of foreign researchers moving
to Luxembourg (up to one year), thus establishing collaborative links between
Luxembourg and foreign research institutions. Luxembourg has also implemented
the Hosting Agreement (‘Scientific Visa’) scheme, which facilitates the inward
migration of third-country researchers. This has helped attract non-EU
researchers to both the public and private sectors.
The
AFR scheme supports researchers in carrying out their PhD and/or post-doctoral
training in collaboration with a private company in Luxembourg. The research
project is developed jointly by the AFR candidate, the private company and the
public partner, and it needs to be innovative and create 'new knowledge'. The
AFR scheme provides for i) researchers to be trained in companies and to carry
out their research training projects in collaboration with the company and ii) companies
to contribute to the training of the researchers and benefit from their
expertise. In 2013, 12 new AFR-public private partnerships (PPP) received
funding, amounting to a total of 38 AFR-PPPs running at the end of 2013.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
For
all its achievements in realising the aims of the other ERA priorities, when it
comes to gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research, Luxembourg
policies have moderate impact.
It
is only recently that concrete links between institutional gender equality
performance and research funding have been established.
There
are no legal barriers to the recruitment or career progression of women and, in
fact, all Luxembourg public research institutions have signed the Code of
Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers that supports gender equality. In
practice, however, the policy environment has not much impact. This is despite
Luxembourg’s open market for researchers and active support of researcher
mobility, described in the section covering ERA Priority 3.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Responding
funders did not indicate any support to gender equality in research. Within the
ERA compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
Researchers
working at the University of Luxembourg and in public research centres are
considered as ‘private employees’, similar to researchers in the private
sector. Social benefits, such as maternity leave and the right to return to a
position following maternity leave, for researchers at all levels, including
PhDs and post doctoral studies are those set in the legal framework of the
general labour market. On a national level, while there are laws prohibiting
discrimination based on gender, there are no policies that explicitly promote
more equal gender representation for researchers. An exception is the NRF,
which encourages Luxembourg PROs to support female candidates for ATTRACT and
PEARL grants. Despite this, of the eight ATTRACT fellows, only two are women
and of the four PEARL grant recipients, there are none.  The Aides à la
Formation-Recherche (AFR) PhD and post-doctoral grant programme is also
supportive of female candidates, and has a good track record in this area,
although selection is made on the basis of the quality of the research
proposed. Still, the proportion of women in the AFR programme, which is more
than 40%, exceeds those in academia or on boards.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
There
seems to be no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research
programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey did not indicate support
for the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
As
regards gender balance in decision-making in Luxembourg new draft laws on the
NRF and CRP state that the proportion of members of Administration Boards and
Scientific Councils is not to fall under 40 % for either gender.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of gender-balanced
recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing
organisations is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Luxembourg is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access (OA), highlighting the need for establishing
common guidelines, the Government programme invites all relevant stakeholders
to allow open access to their scientific publications.
Formal
initiatives addressing OA are a recent development in Luxembourg, which are
being led by the National Library and the University of Luxembourg. It should
be noted that the library has a history of being involved in the Creative
Commons initiative as well as being active in 'Digital Humanities'. The NRF
also signed Science Europe’s Position Statement on Principles for the
Transition to Open Access to Research Publications  in April 2013.
Related
to open access to publications, the University of Luxembourg has chosen to
support the Open Access 'Green Road' which views the author as being at the
heart of the publishing process, including the distribution and promotion of his
or her work. In cooperation with the University of Liege, the university is
implementing the ORBil system to provide the means by which authors can publish
their research and make it publically available. In addition to tools such as
ORBi, a responsive help-desk and targeted training that provide support for the
entire publishing process are key elements in the success of the university’s
OA policy.
In
addition to its own digital repository, the university library is in the
process of becoming Luxembourg’s National Open Access Desk (NOAD) for the
European Commission’s Opener project. OpenAIRE8 provides a platform by which
authors can meet the OA publishing requirements of the European Commission’s
FP7 and, in the future, Horizon 2020 (H2020). The role of the NOAD is to
provide a nationally accessible help-desk which will advise all authors
financed by FP7 and H2020, be they at the university or not.
Although
all PROs, including the university, offer listings of their publications, there
is no use of metadata, either to denote funding source or even provide
keywords. PRO CEPS/Instead publishes the papers that are not issued
“commercially” on its site. The NRF provides the final reports of the projects
it funds.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of publicly funded
scientific publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, there seems to be limited support.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations making scientific research data systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant
cluster.
With
respect to repositories, an OA national repository strategy that goes beyond
the university is not yet in place, although the NRF is a signatory to Science
Europe’s Principles for a transition to  open access.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Luxembourg has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. It fosters an
open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. The
funding organisation has a specific funding line dedicated to the
implementation of knowledge transfer. All of the performance contracts between
the MESR and Luxembourg’s PROs and university foresee PPP's as a key component.
The Cité des Sciences being built in Esch-Belval will provide facilities for
PPP's and a business incubator as well as housing the university and other
PROs. Performance contracts also include targets for filing patents and
spin-offs.
Funding
organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities,
a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programme. A new
initative is a linkage between the NRF and Luxinnovation. To support the
valorisation of the research results of NRF-funded projects, each funded CORE
project will be assessed by the NRF together with Luxinnovation in terms of its
potential economic impact. If such a potential is identified for a given
project, the researchers are invited to collaborate with Luxinnovation in order
to explore its possible valorisation.
Strategic
partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in
Luxemburg.
For
the private sector, the law of 5 June 2009 both foresees the secondment of
researchers to SMEs to carry out research and provides project support.
In
2013, the Technoport business incubator moved into purpose-built facilities in
the City of Sciences. It was awarded the European 'EC-BIC' quality label by the
European Commission in recognition of its services and infrastructure quality.
Finally,
Luxinnovation organises 'Business Meets Research' days as well as running a
cluster programme. Cluster membership represents all the knowledge triangle
parties. Current clusters include eco innovation, healthcare and
biotechnologies, information and communication technologies, material
technologies and space technologies. In 2013, an Automotive Components cluster
was formed. There are also groups for logistics and maritime activities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 94.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 94.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support
KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, there seems to be no research
personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Luxembourg is currently setting
up a strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research
and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible.
An
example of Luxembourg’s e-infrastructure that relates to research is the CVCE
(Centre Virtuel de la Connaissance sur l'Europe), which is a research and
documentation centre for European studies. The Centre creates digital
publications that are particularly geared towards researchers and lecturers,
while remaining open to a wider public.  Like the National Library, it is also
a major actor in 'Digital Humanities.'
RESTENA
is the very high-speed network for the education and research community of
Luxembourg. The connection provides access to the pan-European research network
GÉANT2, as well as to the Internet.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides both federated and premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Luxembourg
was a member of an identity federation in 2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
No
research-performing organisations indicated whether they provide federated
electronic identities for their researchers.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 4 research performing organisations in Luxembourg answered the 2014
ERA survey, which represents % of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011). 
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Luxembourg shows that 50.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA
compliant’ cluster, 50.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’
cluster and n.a. % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’
cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of
researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the
shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 94.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster,
5.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and n.a. % for those
organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.
The
results for the RPOs should be interpreted with caution since two major RPOs
did not reply to the survey, whilst two respondent RPOs tend to have a rather
marginal role in the R&D landscape.
For
the indicator ‘ Share of research performing organisations which have adopted
Gender Equality Plan, the figure should be ‘0%’ amongst the ERA compliant
cluster, as all organisations in this cluster reported not having adopted
Gender Equality Plans.
For
the indicators 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst
research performing organisations' and  ‘Share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.)’, the figures are most likely
underestimated. This is due to the fact that some RPOs did not answer this
question.
More
in general in a small country like Luxembourg some ERA actions are organised in
a more informal way.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Law on NRF || 2014 || X || X 
 Law on research centres || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Revision of the Law of 9 March 1987 on the organisation of the public research centres and on the establishment of the public research centres LIST, Santé and CEPS (to be adopted). ||   ||   ||   
 Strategy Luxembourg 2020 || 2011 ||   ||   
 NCER Programme || 2014 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 PEARL Programme || 2008 ||   ||   
 Performance contracts 2014-2017 between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research and Public Research Organisations Santé, Gabriel Lippmann, Henri Tudor, CEPS, FNR and Luxinnovation Agency. Third contract 2014-2017 between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research || 2014 || X || X 
 Implementation of the pilot-Programme  OPEN || 2013 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Bi-lateral agreements (NRF) || 2012 || X ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 EURAXESS Portal ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 AFR Programme of PhDs and post-docs || 2008 ||   ||   
 Human resources policies for researchers of the Ministry of Higher Education and Research ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 NRF ||   ||   ||   
 draft Law on gender in NRF and CRP || 2014 || X || X 
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Open Access intitiative at the University of Luxembourg || 2013 || X || X 
 Creation of the National Open Acess Desk (NOAD) || 2013 || X || X 
 NRF signatory to Science Europe Open Access principles || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Performance Contracts || 2014 || X || X 
 « Luxembourg cluster initiative » || 2012 || X ||   
 Creation of the new incubator Technoport S.A. || 2012 || X ||   
 Law of 5 June 2009 relating to the promotion of research, development and innovation || 2009 ||   ||   
 Linkage between NRF and Luxinnovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 National Library digital resources access ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are under the common responsibility of the Ministry of
Education and Science (research and development) and the Ministry of Economics
(innovation), which share the governance of the national research and
innovation system. At the political level, a new national authority, namely the
Prime Minister’s Cross-sector Coordination Centre, started coordinating and
monitoring national development planning in 2012. The Latvian Council of
Science henceforth acts as a funding agency for the Ministry of Education and
Science, assessing applications for research funding and allocating money for
fundamental and applied research projects. Its policymaking function has
gradually been taken over by the Ministry, leaving the Council primarily
operating as a research funding council, mostly orientated to the academic
research community. The role of Latvia’s Academy of Sciences as a science
policy adviser has been gradually reduced during the past few years.
A
major reorganisation of the Ministry of Education and Science took place in
2012. The objective was to achieve a smaller, efficient, motivated and
result-orientated state administration in the domains under its political
responsibility (education, science, youth, sports and language). Nevertheless,
this may have caused some delays in preparing the 2014-2020 planning period, as
well as in implementing several important plans, including the ERA dimension.
The
country has adopted several documents relating to national strategy for research
and innovation. The most relevant document is the National Development Plan for
2014-2020 (adopted on 20 December 2012), which foresees to investing on average
1.5 % of GDP in research and development (R&D) by 2020. It integrates
expenditures from national sources and financing from abroad. The other is the
National Reform Programme of Latvia (NRP) for the Implementation of the Europe
2020 strategy. The latter demonstrates a certain attempt to reconsider the
priorities of the research, development and innovation (RDI) strategy in the
light of the economic situation. In 2013, a task force was mobilised to
elaborate the 'Guidelines for Development of Science Technologies and
Innovation [ST&I] for 2014-2020' and efforts were made in order to design
the Regional Smart Specialisation Strategy.' Guidelines for the Development of
Science, Technologies and Innovation for 2014-2020', approved by the government
in December 2013, include a component of the smart specialisation strategy that
has identified a few specialisation fields: knowledge-based bio-economics,
bio-medicine, medical technologies, bio-pharmacy and biotechnologies, advanced
materials, technologies and engineering, smart energy and information and
communication technologies (ICT).
The
National Reform Programme of Latvia sets the following priorities with regard
to the R&D domain: advancement of the potential of scientific activity;
development of a long-term cooperation platform for enterprises and scientists;
and support for developing innovative enterprises. The named priorities have
mainly been selected on the basis of the low share of R&D in gross domestic
product (GDP), which is explained by the small amount of state budget funding,
and an insufficient contribution of the private sector to research.
It
should also be noted that the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation (CSR) for
Latvia invites to 'Take steps for a more integrated and comprehensive research
system also by concentrating financing towards internationally competitive
research institutions'.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Latvia
represented EUR 16 per inhabitant in 2012, less than 10 % of the EU-28 average
(EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.4 % of total government
expenditure and 0.2 % of GDP (Eurostat).
The
share of European Structural Funds in RTD funding has grown over time and in
2013, it has already amounted to twice as much as the national budget.
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in
Latvia has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a
share of GDP has regressed more in Latvia than in the EU-28.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
In
2012-2013, the state budget funding was split in roughly equal shares between
institutional funding (50.5 %) and competitive project-based funding, but when
financing from abroad is discounted, the research community in Latvia is
receiving only 10 % of national funding in the form of institutional funding
directly without competition, while 90 % is awarded on a competitive basis. The
allocation principles of the state budget resources were supposed to be
changed, thus promoting a concentration of excellence and human resources,
fostering cooperation with industry and strengthening national identity. But no
change of that kind seems to have happened in 2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 81.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
International
peer review standards are applied in the evaluation of the research proposals
and institutions by the Latvian Council of Science (starting from 2011) and
partly by a few other bodies responsible for allocating research funds. New
rules for the evaluation of proposals are currently under development under the
responsibility of the Latvian Council of Science.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
In
the past, institutional funding has not been allocated based on transparent
institutional assessment. This is the reason why the 2013 country specific
recommendation advised to 'take further steps to modernise research
institutions based on the ongoing independent assessment'. This assessment is
currently taking place, and its outcome should be known during the summer of
2014. In parallel, a research institution development strategy should be
developed until 1 July of 2014.
The
outcome of the evaluation of scientific institutions will influence the
allocation of institutional funding, but this will only be an indirect one.
Latvian authorities are indeed planning to establish the link between the
allocation of institutional funding, including the funding of the State
National Research Centres, and the granting of the EU Structural Funds.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It strongly supports also
bilateral and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Latvia allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Latvia
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
So
far, there has not been any strategy aiming at either designing national joint
or open research programmes in general or concerning the grand challenges, in
particular outside the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) and Horizon 2020 in
Latvia. FP7 fosters the cooperation between the Member States’ institutions,
the Associated Countries and the third countries. In FP7, Latvia’s share of
contribution in total participation is 0.3 % and the country received 0.1 % of
the total European Commission contribution. FP funding represents EUR 20 per
inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and
6.8 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period
2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same
period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, Latvia is associated as an observer to two of
the ten ongoing initiatives: Water Challenges for a Changing world, and A
healthy diet for a healthy life.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), Latvia is involved in Eurostars (FP7), Joint Baltic
Sea Research and Development Programme (BONUS) (FP7/Horizon 2020) and
Eurostars2 (Horizon 2020). In the context of FP7, Latvia was also active in two
joint technological initiatives: ARTEMIS and IMI.
The
funding of supported activities under article 185 (BONUS and Eurostars programmes)
amounted to approximately 0.16 % of total public RTD funding in 2013.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination of national and regional research programmes. The
country participates in teh ERA-Nets projects, which help to coordinate the
activities of participating countries. The country also participates in three
ERA-Net Plus actions, which have high European added value and additional EU
financial support to facilitate joint calls for proposals between national
and/or regional programmes.
Latvia
has no other joint research agenda within ERA.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with the third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. A small-scale joint research
cooperation programme is running with Belarus, where the selection of bilateral
cooperation projects is based on the evaluation of the proposals at national
level with a subsequent joint decision by both parties. A trilateral cooperation
between Latvia, Lithuania and Taiwan has also been active for 13 years. The
small mobility programme 'Osmoze' between Latvia and France has been available
for researchers since 2002.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Latvia allocated
to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the
EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is equal to 0. However, it
is positive in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer review
standards is not supported. No attempts have been made to accept the mutual
recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer-review
standards as a basis for national funding decisions.
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of
joint programmes are only applied by Latvian funding ministries in particular
cases where such need is necessary, like Article 185 BONUS and EUROSTARS,
Article 187 ARTEMIS, ERA-NETs and ERA-NETs Plus, or within the EUREKA
Framework.
Funding
ministries do not implement 'Money follows cooperation', which is a scheme that
enables small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research
councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither of the funding
ministries implement 'Money follows researchers', which is a scheme that
enables researchers to move to a research institution in a different country to
transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research
activities according to the original terms and objectives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
Research
funders in Latvia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
For
the time being, Latvia is not a member of any international or European
scientific organisation. However, in terms of participation in the development
of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research
Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory
phase of four of them. Latvia also plans to be involved in the following ESFRI
research infrastructure projects: BBMRI, CLARIN, ESS Survey, ESSneutron and
EU-OPENSCREEN.
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the ESFRI Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of four
of them.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Latvia is currently not involved in any of the consortia that adopt the
legal framework designed by the European Commission to facilitate the establishment
and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving
several European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures, Latvia does not yet have any national roadmap for national and
regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest. The Latvian Academy
of Sciences is responsible for the development of such a document, which is
still under process in 2014. In such a situation, no financial commitments to
European and international research infrastructures have yet been allocated.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Policies
facilitating cross-border access to research infrastructures are not present in
Latvia and, accordingly, no direct financial support is available from the
national budget. Benefit from the transnational access to research
infrastructures is, however, possible through the relevant FP7 projects that
offer competitive fellowships, as well as through nationally funded research
projects.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Latvia in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Latvia
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and the recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 3.947 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Latvia in 2011. This
represents 3.8 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 3.0 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 1.8 in Latvia,
compared with 9.0 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7
In
2012, 61 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Vacancies
for academic positions and top-level positions in publicly funded scientific
institutions and publicly funded higher education institutions (HEIs)are
advertised in the official newspaper Latvijas Vestnesis (Latvian Herald)
(online newspaper since 1 January 2013). The EURAXESS jobs portal provides a
link to the official newspaper. Institutions may take additional measures in
order to advertise job vacancies.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
implementation of the ‘European Charter for Researchers’ and the ‘Code of
Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers’ is not directly promoted at
national level. 
By
May 2014, one Latvian organisation was involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers.
A
number of Latvian universities have implemented dedicated study programmes
(Master and doctoral studies) aimed at promoting researchers’ skills sets and
career prospects, including inter-sectoral cooperation and mobility.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.0 in
2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
2009/2010, the University of Latvia and the Riga Technical University set up
doctoral schools. The European Social Fund (ESF)-supported activities also aim
to increase the quality of doctoral training. The ESF co-funded activity
'Support for the implementation of doctoral study programmes (2007-2013)'
offered doctoral studies free of charge on a competitive basis. There is no
formal bar on foreign students applying for state-funded PhDs in Latvia; in
practice, language barriers are a disincentive.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 0.4 % in Latvia compared with 1.7 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 0.2 % in Latvia
compared with 2.0 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 24.2 %. 
The
ESF co-funded activities promote the return of Latvian researchers and the
involvement of foreign researchers. For example, the involvement of mobile
researchers is one of the criteria for the evaluation of grant proposals in the
context of the ESF activities within the field of higher education and science.
One
of the strategic objectives of the 'Commercialisation of science and transfer
of technologies' (European Regional Development Fund, ERDF 2010-2015) is to
boost the exploitation of science and the transfer of technologies by promoting
cooperation between research and industry in the implementation of industrial
research projects (applied research), and the development of new products and
technologies.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Gender
equality in public research in Latvia falls under the Labour Act, which
provides formal equal opportunities for men and women, and restricts
discrimination against women in employment. The law notably stipulates that a
woman who makes use of maternity leave shall have her previous job ensured or,
if this is not possible, a similar or equivalent position with no less
favourable conditions and employment provisions.
Due
to austerity measures that have had to be taken since 2009, there is a very
limited institutional funding of research in Latvia. In such a situation, the
female research community is much more vulnerable: practically, due to very
high level of project-based competitive funding, it appears to be difficult for
managers to solve the issues of maternity leave and the return problems in a
decent and appropriate way.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within
the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
According
to Latvian laws, on the one hand, there are no legal barriers that hinder the
recruitment, career retention and progression of female researchers, which is
why, on the other hand, there is no legal framework for female careers
specifically in research in Latvia, or any specific measure that targets female
researchers. In terms of maternity leave, the current situation is
controversial: the law theoretically guarantees the restoration of the same
position, but managers usually have no resources to satisfy this legal duty.
When working in the framework of a fixed-term contract, it is, for the same
reason, difficult to receive an extension of the contract due to maternity
leave.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Regarding
the measures supporting the gender dimension in research programmes and
projects in Latvia, European Structural and Investment Funds co-fund activities
aiming at promoting gender equality in the field of research. The promotion of
gender equality is one of the criteria for the evaluation of grant proposals.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 52.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 17.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
There
are no examples of policy actions or regulation acts that are specific to the
research sector promoting equal gender representation in academic and research
committees, boards and governing bodies, etc. in Latvia. There are, however,
some rare cases where funders set specific conditions in their calls for
proposals.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 60 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Latvia is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, there is no national initiative. This means
that the Latvian research funders have no specific policies on open access, but
in order to gain more visibility for their work and more impact on
international research, scientific institutions and researchers publish in open
access journals and repositories. The University of Latvia is a partner in the
OpenAIRE project. In fact, measures supporting open access to research
publications and data (online and free access) have mostly been implemented as
a result of FP7 projects.
Related
to open access to publications, the free access granted to scientific research
for specific sectors (e.g. the academic sector) and for the results of publicly
funded research is only the result of the implementation of FP6 and FP7
projects.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, there is no policy or support in Latvia, except in
relation to FP7 projects.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Latvia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support open access to data.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations making scientific research data systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, there is no specific national infrastructure in Latvia
than the one developed in the frame of the Open AIRE project.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, Latvia has developed a knowledge transfer strategy, which aims at
fostering an open circulation of knowledge between companies and research
organisations. During the period 2007-2013, the strategy was funded with
structural funds under the framework of the EU regional policy. It was
implemented, monitored and controlled by the Ministry of Economics, who was
also in charge of providing information to the public on the implementation of
this programme. The Latvian Investment and Development Agency was a cooperation
organisation responsible for the operational tasks: establishing the evaluation
committee, launching calls for proposals, signing contracts, etc. The call for
proposals was launched in 2008 for the period of 2008-2013.
The
programme operated via competitive multiannual grants allocated to higher
education institutions and research institutes for the establishment and
operation of technology transfer offices. Eight technology transfer units were
embedded in HEIs (University of Latvia, Riga Technical University, Ventspils
University College, Rezekne Higher Education Institution, Latvia University of
Agriculture, Riga Stradins University, Daugavpils University, Laboratory of
Design innovation and technologies at the Art Academy of Latvia). Leading
scientists from the major universities of Latvia, together with 50 innovative
entrepreneurs, teamed up in order to establish a technology transfer centre for
innovative products.
In
applying the EU structural funds rules, the Ministry of Economics has supported
the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition
to increase the rate of success of the programme.
Funding
organisations do not support strategic partnerships and/or the definition of
joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry in Latvia.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 24.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, it is quite high in the
cluster limited compliance to ERA.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations
having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. It is also quite high in the
cluster limited compliance to ERA.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. It is also quite high
in the cluster limited compliance to ERA.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research
services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Latvia has not set up any
strategy. However, through the Latvian Academic Identity Federation (LAIFE),
Latvia is a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy
exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation
between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations. LATNET is the Latvian
National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service
provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education
communities within the country.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides cloud services (NREN service
implementation support).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Latvia
is not a member of an identity federation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 14 research performing organisations in Latvia answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 29.4 % of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Latvia shows that 21.4 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’
cluster, 64.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 14.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 56.6 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 37.8 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Procedures for evaluation, financing and management of fundamental and applied research projects ||   ||   ||   
 Regulation on support for science and research || 2009 ||   ||   
 Rules of the Latvian Council of Science Competitive research grants || 2006 ||   ||   
 Guidelines on Research, Technology Development and Innovation for 2014-2020 || 2013 || X || X 
 Establishment of national research centres || 2012 || X ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Law on Research Activity Procedures for the allocation of Institutional funding to State Scientific Institutions, State Institutions of HE and the Scientific Institutes of State Institutions of HE || 2005 ||   ||   
 Methodology and criteria for international assessment of public and private scientific institutions || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Procedures for the Provision of State aid for participation in international collaborative programmes in research and technology || 2008 ||   ||   
 Bilateral cooperation programmes with Belarus, Ukraine and France Trilateral cooperation programmes with Lithuania and Taiwan || 2009 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Regulations on development of the research infrastructure || 2010 ||   ||   
 Science in Latvia || 2010 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Law on immigration and research activity regulating contracts with foreign researchers. || 2008 ||   ||   
 Attraction of Human Resources to Science (ERDF 2009-2015) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Regulation on support to the implementation of doctoral programmes and postdoctoral research || 2009 ||   ||   
 Support for implementation of PhD studies (scholarship programme funded by ERDF) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Euraxess Latvia || 2009 ||   ||   
 Development of Human Resources in Scieujknce (ERDF support for development of new research groups). || 2008 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Labour Law || 2001 ||   ||   
 Concept paper on Gender Equality implementation Plan for Gender Equality implementation in 2012-2014 || 2012 || X ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Competitive VEGA grants || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
  Programme for Technology transfer contact points || 2009 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN (Membership through LAIFE) ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry for Education
and Employment. Within the framework of the Ministry, the Malta Council for
Science and Technology (MCST) is the body responsible for developing,
implementing and managing research and innovation policy and the national
funding programme. Malta Enterprise, which answers to the Ministry of Economy,
Investment and Small Business, is the national development agency responsible
for supporting the private sector and operates a number of research and
development (R&D) schemes. Malta’s research landscape is relatively small
with one public university, the University of Malta, which is the main research
performer in the higher education sector, and one public research organisation,
the Malta Aquaculture Research Centre. There are four public funding
organisations in Malta: the Ministry for Finance,which allocates institutional
funding to the University of Malta and government departments; the Planning and
Priorities Coordination Division within the Ministry for European Affairs, which
manages the allocation of EU structural funds, the MCST, which manages the
national research and innovation programme and the Commercialisation Programme
and Malta Enterprise, which manages a combination of national funds and EU
structural funds.
The
National Research and Innovation (R&I) Strategy 2020, which was adopted in
February 2014, outlines Malta’s R&D priorities between 2014 and 2020. It
identifies eight areas for smart specialisation and aims at promoting the ERA
objectives. The National R&I Strategy will be complemented by an R&I
Action Plan, which will identify specific measures and timelines up to 2020 for
achieving the objectives outlined in the National R&I Strategy. The
National R&I Strategy will also be implemented through the Technology
Development Programme (formerly known as the National R&I Programme), which
provides R&D grants.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Malta represented EUR49 per inhabitant in
2012 (EUR179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR46. In 2012,
total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7 % of total government expenditures and 0.3 %
of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in
Malta has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a
share of GDP has evolved positively in Malta even when it declined from the EU-28
level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
funding is allocated a competitive basis through the Technology Development
Programme (formerly known as the National R&I Programme). The Technology
Development Programme provides R&D grants for projects jointly undertaken
by industry and academia. The annual budget for Malta's national research and
innovation programme amounted to approx. Euro 1.4 million in 2013.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are implemented within the
framework of the Technology Development Programme, although it is not clear
whether international peers are systematically used. All proposals are
submitted in English.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is never allocated based on institutional assessment. There are no
institutional assessments of the University of Malta or the public research
centre and the allocation of institutional funding is therefore not based on
performance.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of
institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Malta
faces the issues of a small country with limited R&D capacity and funding
to engage in cross-border cooperation. The National Research and Innovation
Strategy 2020 emphasises the need to focus cross-border cooperation in the
eight areas identified for smart specialisation. However, the strategy does not
provide specific policies or actions supporting joint research activities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 28.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 28.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Malta allocated to transnationally
coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Malta dedicated
to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than
the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of participation by Malta of the total participation is 0.2 %
and the country received 0.05 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7
funding represents EUR42 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR72 per capita) for
the period 2007-2013 and 9.6 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of
GERD for the same period). Given the relative short history of R&D policy
in Malta, the majority of efforts have been directed towards Malta’s
participation in the EU's Framework Programme. The National Research and
Innovation Strategy 2020 further supports Malta’s participation to the EU
Framework Programme.
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in two of the ten
ongoing initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are
Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, and Urban Europe
- Global Challenges, Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in one programme. In Horizon
2020, the country is already involved in one of the four existing initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of eight ERA-Nets, of which four are
currently still running. The country also has participated in ERA-Net Plus
actions in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial
support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Malta
has a cooperation agreement with CERN and also signed a cooperation agreement
in 2012 with the European Space Agency. Discussions are currently taking place
with the European Biology Molecular Laboratory (EMBL) with a view to eventually
signing a bilateral agreement.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, no
measures are reported.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting international cooperation with third countries. RPOs
responding to the survey did not receive any funding from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
In
terms of mutual recognition of evaluations, no measures are reported.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting the allocation of project-based funding on peer reviewed
decisions made by non-national institutions.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Malta allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is equal to 0.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Malta
participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA
and EFDA.
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of two of them (4 %). Malta is a
member of DARIAH and BBMRI. The country coordinates none of them.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures, Malta has contributed EUR4 500 for DARIAH and EUR 20 657 for
BBMRI in 2014.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Malta participates in BBMRI ERIC, one of the seven consortiums that
adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the
establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest
involving several European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures, Malta does not have a national roadmap for infrastructures.
The National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 supports investment in
research infrastructures linked to Malta’s thematic specialisations. The
strategy also indicates Malta’s intention to participate in the development of
pan-European research infrastructures by linking it with identified priority
themes and investments in national research infrastructures. However, no
funding is ring-fenced for the construction and operation of ESFRI, global,
national and regional RIs of pan-European interest. The construction of the
Life Sciences Centre may be considered a first step towards the development of
a national research infrastructure.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 includes a recommendation
supporting Maltese researchers’ access to research infrastructures of interest
outside Malta.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Malta in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Malta
_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 759 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Malta in 2011. This
represents 4.2 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with 5.3 among the
Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of
6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2012, 55 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Public
service and public sector research vacancies are not published on Europe-wide
platforms and there are no plans at present to publish public service and
public sector jobs on EURAXESS. However, the University of Malta advertises its
vacancies online on its own website and its job vacancies are available through
EURAXESS.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Maltese government has not yet actively promoted the implementation of the
‘Charter & Code’ by research institutions and funders. It is in the process
of identifying measures to promote its adoption. However, the institutions are
implementing many of the provisions of the ‘Charter & Code’. The new
National R&I Strategy 2020 refers explicitly to the 'Charter & Code',
and recommends their adoption by public employers and research funders.
The
Malta Council for Science and Technology provides support to researchers to
participate in Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) projects and the
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme. The University of Malta has developed a
career stream for researchers. In addition, academic members of staff have a
clear career progression from assistant lecturer all the way through to the
level of professor, and they are contractually bound to undertake research
activities for one third of their time.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.3 in
2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 1.7.
The
Maltese government has not put in place any measures to increase the quality of
doctoral training and has not developed a specific Skills’ Agenda. However, the
University of Malta is participating in a European Social Fund (ESF) project that
will result in offering a masters’ course in entrepreneurship, as well as
establishing a Business Incubation Centre at the University of Malta. The
Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI) was set up in May
2013 as a centre of excellence in entrepreneurship at the University of Malta
(UoM), complementing the existing endeavours in the area. As an academic
centre, CEBI trains students and staff in the science and art of
entrepreneurship using a participant-centred, hands-on approach by leveraging
entrepreneurship expertise at the University of Malta, as well as with
experienced local and foreign entrepreneurs. In July 2013, CEBI launched an
intensive training programme in entrepreneurship, in collaboration with Isis
Innovation. The development of this programme has been supported through the
ESF project. A total of around 50 students are following the Programme.
The
new National R&I Strategy 2020 focuses mainly on the importance of
nurturing a researcher pool with awareness, expertise and experience in both
the academic and business camps, which benefits both the individual's career
path as well as further industry development. In addition, the strategy also
emphasises the importance of coupling the drive towards increasing the number of
doctoral and post-doctoral graduates with a drive to attract research
initiatives to Malta to provide career opportunities for new researchers.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 4.1 % in Malta compared with 4.2 % among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.4 % in Malta compared
with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2
%. 
The
Maltese government has not put in place any measures to attract and retain
leading national, EU and third-country researchers. The STEPS programme
provided funding for doctoral candidates to pursue studies either in Malta or
overseas. The same rationale applies for the Master It! programme. The Malta
Government Scholarship Scheme (MGSS) also allows awardees to pursue their
studies abroad, in addition to supporting those students who opt to conduct
part of their assignment at world-renowned research institutes.
The
Malta Council for Science and Technology provides state financing in the form
of grants for research, development and innovation in science and technology through
the National R&I Programme, which was set up in 2004. One of the
eligibility conditions of the National Research and Innovation Programme is
that proposals may only be submitted by consortia that involve both an academic
and an industry partner, thus leading to better links between these two
sectors.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
Gender Equality Action Plan 2009-2010 included a number of measures aiming at
achieving gender equality; however, no follow-up measures were proposed after
it expired in 2010. No measures addressing gender equality in research are
reported besides general legislation and/or soft measures.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 95 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average. Within the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing
organisations having adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that within
the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. 
Regarding
careers and working conditions in public research for female researchers, there
are no reported measures.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing organisations
implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. 
As
regards gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no reported
measures.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Also, RPOs did not include the gender dimension in research contents.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
As
regards gender balance in decision-making, there are no reported measures.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
There
seems to be no gender balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers
among responding research performing organisations nor gender-balanced research
evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations. 
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the National Research and Innovation Strategy
2020 highlights the need to support open access to publications resulting from
publicly-funded research. However, there is currently no overall legislative or
policy framework supporting open access. Malta is a participant in the OpenAIRE
Plus project.
Related
to open access to publications, the National Research and Innovation Strategy
2020 promotes the use of open access to publications resulting from
publicly-funded research. Publications arising from projects funded under the
National R&I Programme have to be deposited in an open access repository at
the moment of publication. The electronic copy shall become freely available to
all within six months of publication. However, it is not clear to what extent
this requirement in the National R&I Programme is monitored and enforced.
Open access-related costs are not included in the list of eligible costs in the
programme.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 95 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support Open
Access to publications is higher than the EU average. No RPO who answered the
survey indicated that they have publications in OA.
Concerning
open access to data, the National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020
supports open access to scientific data, however the strategy does not make any
specific recommendations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to supporting Open Access to data. 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing organisations
making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
As
regards to repositories, there are no reported measures.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private
sectors, knowledge transfer has been acknowledged as a priority in both the
National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 and Malta’s 2014 National Reform
Programme. Knowledge transfer has been at the core of Malta’s National R&I
Programme, which funds projects that are jointly undertaken by industry and academia.
One of the eligibility criteria is that the project consortia should include
both academia and industry partners. Projects financed by the National R&I
Programme also need to demonstrate a strong commercialisation potential. In
addition, Malta Enterprise runs several schemes (e.g. advisory services for
researchers in search of venture capital, loans for highly qualified personnel,
royalty income from patents) supporting public-private cooperation in the field
of industrial and experimental development. Malta has not developed a knowledge
transfer strategy. 
Regarding
support to technology transfer offices (TTOs), the professionalisation of the
KT office at the University of Malta Technology has been supported by the
Entrepreneurship Training Programme. This programme, which runs between 2011
and 2014 and is funded under the ESF, aims at increasing awareness and
providing training related to knowledge transfer and intelIectual property
rights (IPR).
The
knowledge transfer office at the University of Malta - which was set up in 2010
- and the development of Malta's Life Sciences Centre - which is a
state-of-the-art industrial park dedicated to the life sciences sector -
constitute important steps towards the development of strong public-private
linkages. The Malta Life Sciences Centre will include the BioMalta campus,
which will be a bio-medical cluster between the University of Malta, Mater Dei
Hospital and the life sciences industry. Moreover, the Centre for
Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI), set up in May 2013 at the
University of Malta, will act as both a business incubator to support spin-offs
and a catalyst for seed and venture capital funds. The University of Malta has
also published guidelines to regulate the joint ownership of intellectual
property resulting from academic research. Given that these measures are fairly
recent, it is still too early to assess their effectiveness.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support KT,
OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster..
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, there seems to be no research personnel
whose primary occupation is in the private sector.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the draft National R&I
Strategy 2011-2020 highlights the need to include e-infrastructures in the
development of a national roadmap for research infrastructures. The University
of Malta is a partner of the EU-funded project GÉANT serving Europe’s research
and education community. The country has implemented a research and education
network, which is essential to make digital services possible. UoM-CSC is the
Maltese National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet service
provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education
communities within the country. Malta has not set up a strategy for the
implementation of Digital ERA.
As
regards digital services, no measures are reported.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is hihgher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Malta
was not a member of an identity federation in either 2011 or 2013. The country
is not member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange
of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between
the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, there seems to be no provision of digital
research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform,
etc.).
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 3 research performing organisations in Malta answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 79.9% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Malta shows that n.a. % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 33.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 66.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’
organisations are n.a. % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 99.3 % for the ‘ERA
limited compliant’ cluster and 0.7 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
In
particular, one RPO concentrates the overwhelming majority of R&D personnel,
which explains the particularly high or low percentages for some of the
indicators. 
For
the indicator ‘Share of funders which can base their project based research and
development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions’,
it should be noted that the mutual recognition of peer reviews is outside the
scope of Malta’s national R&D programme/policy and hence it is not
implemented by funders. 
For
the indicator ‘Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst
research performing organisations’, the main RPO did not provide an answer to
this question.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 R&I Action Plan || 2014 || X || X 
 Technology Development Programme || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 National Research and Innovation (R&I) Programme (renamed the “Technology Development Programme” in 2014) || 2004 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess Malta || 2004 ||   ||   
 The Malta Government Scholarship Scheme (MGSS) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Endorsement of the Charter by the Office of the Prime Minister || 2005 ||   ||   
 Setting up of a post-doctoral scheme and community at the University of Malta (part of Malta's 2011-2015 NRP) ||   ||   ||   
 STEPS scheme || 2009 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Rules for participation in the National Research and Innovation Programme || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 University of Malta knowledge transfer office  - Entrepreneurship Training Programme || 2011 ||   ||   
 Life Sciences Centre/BioMalta Campus ||   ||   ||   
 Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI) || 2013 || X || X 
 National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Malta Enterprise R&D incentives schemes (e.g. Loan for Highly Qualified Personnel, Industrial Property Rights Costs for SMEs Scheme, Industrial Research and Experimental Development Scheme) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Technology Transfer Office at the University of Malta and University Trust Fund || 2009 ||   ||   
 National Research and Innovation (R&I) Programme (renamed the “Technology Development Programme” in 2014) || 2012 || X ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Parliament, the Cabinet
and the Ministries. There are different coordination mechanisms at this level.
A dedicated Cabinet council called the Economic Affairs, Infrastructure and the
Environment Subcommittee (REZIM) is concerned with issues related to the
economy, science and research policies, higher education and innovation, and
consists of the ministers most closely involved with these matters. Its
counterpart at ministry level is called the Economic Affairs, Infrastructure
and Environment Committee (CEZIM). For consultations between Parliament and the
Cabinet, both the Upper and Lower House have a Committee for Education, Culture
and Science. On both these levels there is an Economic Committee addressing
innovation.
Different
ministries play a role in implementing these policies, by means of different
instruments and with the help of specific actors in the innovation system. The
most prominent ministries involved, as reflected in the budget to be allocated,
are the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) and the Ministry of
Economic Affairs (EZ). The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science has broad
political-administrative and financial responsibility for public-sector
research in the Netherlands. Most of its budget is in the form of institutional
funding. The Ministry of Economic Affairs is responsible for facilitating a
competitive business climate and primarily addresses industry-orientated
research and development (R&D) and innovation.
Funding
bodies:
The
main actors and institutions responsible for allocating funds for research and
innovation in the universities are the responsible ministries, OCW and EZ, and
a group of main funding bodies: the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
Research (NWO), the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) for
scientific research and the Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO.nl) (the latter
allocates financing instruments that are aimed at industrial research,
innovation and collaborative projects). Funding for scientific research in
Dutch universities is provided along three routes:
 1)
Institutional funding, mainly by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
for the higher education institutions (HEIs) (including university hospitals
with involvement from the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports).
Institutional funding of the Agricultural University of Wageningen by the
Ministry of Economic Affairs;
2)
Competitive funding based on scientific excellence by the NWO and KNAW both
KNAW and NWO also fund their own institutes; 
3)
Project-based funding from different sources like industry, foundations and
international organisations. 
KNAW
primarily funds its own institutes but also offers limited competitive funding
for some programmes (and prizes/awards). Research is also funded by some
ministries own knowledge institutes, and by their policy-oriented research.
Public
research organisations for applied research are partly financed by the Ministry
of Economic Affairs, other ministries and partly by private organisations for
applied research.
The
country has adopted a national strategy for research and innovation which
consists of two dedicated policies addressing research and innovation. These
are described in the corresponding policy documents 'Quality in diversity -
Strategic Agenda for Higher Education, Research, and Science' (to be renewed in
the fall of 2014 by the new vision on Science Policy) and 'To the Top - Towards
a new Industrial Policy' (2011), the specific part of the new Enterprise
Policy. 
The
nine Top Sectors of the Enterprise Policy should (among other things) promote
the synergy and coherence of research and innovation activities on economic and
social priorities, and foster public-private cooperation and leverage private
investments. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are stimulated by means of the
TKI supplement (named after the 19 'top consortia for knowledge and innovation'
that commenced the implementation of Top Sector research roadmaps) and the MIT
(MKB Innovatiestimulering Topsectoren), the latter targeting small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). 
The
new Innovation Policy has coincided with the start of a major shift from direct
funding of research and innovation to indirect funding by fiscal measures.
Thus, investments in private R&D are stimulated primarily by tax measures,
notably from 2012 onwards. Additional funds are available for the Top Sectors
(TKI supplement) and for fundamental research; the latter will continue to be
allocated competitively based on scientific excellence and mainly by the
research council NWO. The shift in the funding of business R&D could lead
to a larger share of user-inspired types of fundamental and applied research in
the Netherlands’ overall research output, with more short-term economic and
societal impact. 
The
government of the Netherlands has an instrument for the periodic review of
selected national policies areas. The aim is to identify various policy options
and possibilities for future savings, and to achieve more value for money based
on ex ante and ex post evaluations. During such a review, the Ministry of
Finance, the ministry in charge of the policy area and independent organisations
are brought together to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing
policy tools. A recent review of the science policy reconfirmed the relevance
of the national science policy and proved the effectiveness and efficiency of
the policy tools under consideration. Therefore, on the basis of this evidence
it was concluded that the science system works well and that no general
revision is needed. However, there may be areas where adjustments would be
desirable to make operating the system more 'future proof'. The conclusions
will be taken up in the new vision on Science Policy, which will appear in the
fall of autumn 2014.
The
effect of the Top Sector policy on fundamental research will be closely
monitored by the Advisory Council on Science and Technology Policy (AWT), which
will issue a second monitoring report by the end of 2014.
N.W.O
and KNAW are also working on new strategies.
The
  Netherlands has a Country Specific Recommendation: 'Protect expenditure in
areas directly relevant for growth such as education, innovation and research'.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in the Netherlands represented EUR 279 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the
GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR274. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5
% of total government expenditure (total government expenditure provides a
partial indication of the effort made by national public authorities on R&D
as they do not account for the substantial fiscal measures) and 0.8 % of gross
domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in
the Netherlands has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD.
GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed in the Netherlands but less than the
evolution observed in the  EU-28.
However,
the GBOARD does not show the complete picture for the Netherlands. Apart from direct support to R&D, indirect support by fiscal measures (tax
benefits) plays an important role in the Netherlands. The sum of direct and
indirect support has increased over the period 2007-2012 and was close to 1 % of
GDP in 2012. In 2013 fiscal measures were slightly over EUR one billion on a
total direct and indirect government expenditure on R&D and innovation of
almost EUR six billion. 
According
to the Rathenau report 'Total investment in Research & Innovation 2012-2018'
the government continues its R&D funding largely through institutional
funding. The share of project funding will decrease in the coming years
according to the multiannual budget from 29 to 24 %, and the share of
institutional funding will increase from 71 to 76 % in 2018. 
The
effectiveness and efficiency of the Dutch research system is also being pursued
by introducing new competitive funding elements in the education agenda of the
universities. From the institutional funding for education, 7 % of the budget
for education by universities is performance-based. Furthermore, the number of
PhDs a year is also part of the institutional funding of the universities and
is a performance criteria. Other notable changes in the funding of research in
the Dutch research system include the increasing proportion of competitive
funding for applied research, more money for participation in European research
programmes and the TKI supplement, which can be used for research projects (but
always in collaboration with public research institutes). The competitive
funding for fundamental research through N.W.O grants is being continued.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Both
the Enterprise Policy and the research agenda are orientated towards
competitive forms of funding. The new or updated measures for competitive
funding (institutional and project-based), as presented in the 2014 budget
agreement, include the following:
•           TKI
supplement: In 2013, the 19 Top Consortia for Knowledge and Innovation (TKIs)
started organising the research agenda of their own sectors. Organisations who
wish to participate in research projects and innovation activities coordinated
by TKIs can provide funding for public-private research projects. Companies
should provide cash or (starting in 2014) in kind means for at least 40 % of
the project cost. This private investment then generates the TKI supplement –
equal to 25 % of the project cost – which the TKI can subsequently use for
additional research, development and innovation projects. 
•           The
government will gradually increase spending on fundamental research to EUR 100
million, for both independent research and the fundamental research carried out
in the joint programmes with the Top Sectors. The increased spending started at
EUR 25 million in 2014, rising to EUR 75 million in 2015, 2016 and 2017, and
reaching EUR 100 million from 2018.
The
NWO contributed EUR 235 million to fundamental/basic research themes drawn by
the private sector and the government in the Top Sector Innovation Contracts
during the period 2012-2013. In accordance with the coalition agreement in
2012, the NWO is expected to designate EUR 275 million for excellent basic
research in the Top Sectors in 2015, from it’s total means of EUR 625 million. 
•           The
Gravity (Zwaartekracht) programme offers additional institutional funding for
top research consortia in the Netherlands. This is competitive institutional
funding for a maximum of ten years and aims to support outstanding research in
consortia with top researchers from various universities and research
institutes.  
To
increase the effectiveness and efficiency of publicly funded institutes for
applied research (TO2), the government published a vision on the methods and governance
in 2013. The way forward in these areas requires new and more cohesive methods
in programming and conducting this research, methods which are more closely
tailored to the top sector policy and future challenges. In 2014, the TNO will
be releasing a new strategic plan and all other applied research institutions
(TO2) have produced a joint strategic framework that has been sent to
Parliament in July.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
Dutch Science System has as a basis for its evaluation the national Standard
Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. This lays down four main assessment criteria:
quality, productivity, feasibility/vitality and societal relevance. A separate
international committee is appointed to evaluate each institute, working on the
basis of a self-evaluation report from the institute and a site visit. The most
recent evaluations of the NWO and KNAW are being conducted in 2014. In
addition, the KNAW and NWO institutes, as well as university groups, are also
evaluated. A new evaluation protocol was published in March 2014.  The
principles of peer-review depend on the funding organisation: these are mainly
the NWO for scientific research and the RVO for industrial research.
NWO
The
core principles of peer-review are that all funding provided by the NWO is
based on international peer-review standards. The implementation of
international peer-review standards is described in detail in the application
guides, through website information for applicants and strategy documents. 
Netherlands
Enterprise Agency (RVO)
The
RVO, formerly Agency NL, is responsible for implementing innovation policy
measures, including the tax benefits WBSO and RDA. It also collects most of the
data associated with these policies, which are often the basis for evaluating
of the individual instruments. The performance of the RVO itself is measured by
a number of operational indicators and targets, which are stated in the annual
contract between the RVO and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
HEI:
The
effectiveness and efficiency of the Dutch research system is also being pursued
by introducing new competitive funding schemes for the education agenda in the
universities. As the institutions are autonomous, performance agreements were
agreed in the autumn of 2012 with mechanisms for financial sanctions. Seven per
cent of the university budget for the education agenda for 2012-2016 is
performance-based rather than via institutional funding. This relates only to
the institutional funding for universities, thus excluding the funding through
the N.WO, which is all allocated by means of competition. As of 2013,
additional resources are available for quality and profile, representing about
7 % of educational funding. Of this, 5 % is for quality (conditional funding)
and 2 % for profile (selective budget). The funding in the period 2013-2016
will be awarded on the basis of the performance agreements with individual
universities and colleges. For education and academic achievement (quality), an
amount of EUR 200 million will be available in 2013, rising to EUR 245 million
in 2016.
Public
Research Organisations (PROs):
The
Dutch Science System has as a basis for its evaluation the national Standard
Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. This lays down three main assessment criteria:
research quality, relevance to society and viability (being equipped for the future).
An international committee is appointed to evaluate each institute, working on
the basis of a self-evaluation report from the institute and a site visit.
Judgement by an international committee is both qualitative and quantitative
and provides recommendations. Furthermore, the committee also evaluates the PhD
programmes and research integrity. The most recent evaluations were conducted
in 2013.  
Top
Sectors:
Developments
related to the Top Sectors are being monitored on a continuous basis. After the
introduction of the report by the Theeuwes commission (on evaluation
methodology), several instrument evaluations (i.e. WBSO, Innovation Credit)
have adopted the new guidelines for evaluation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 7.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is
lower than the EU average.
2. 
 TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 11.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in the Netherlands allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in the Netherlands dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of participation of the Netherlands in the total participation
is 6.9 % and the country received 8.4 % of total European Commission
contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 181 per inhabitant (the EU average is
EUR72  per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 5.6 % of the gross domestic
expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data)
(the EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Through
the N.W.O the government has provided a stimulus for co-financing participation
in European programmes (EUR36 million for 2014-2017).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all ten of the
ongoing initiatives and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food security, Agriculture and Climate
Change (FACCE), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for
Europe, Healthy diet for healthy life, The demographic change (More Years, better
life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting climate knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water challenges for a
changing world, Healthy and productive seas and oceans, and Urban Europe -
Global challenges, local solutions. 
The
NWO supports the participation with the European Science Foundation joint
schemes (European Cooperative Research Projects and Eurocores programmes), COST
actions, EUREKA and Joint Technology Initiatives. Furthermore, NWO participates
in in the realisation of a joint strategy of European research councils and is
involved in international/European fora and meetings about European joint
programming, international research infrastructures etc. Joint research
agenda's in Joint Programming Initiatives, ERA-nets, and article 169/185
networks are managed by the NWO. 
The
NWO also supports research and actions in the domain of several broad themes
that relate to national and international agendas. The selection of these
themes is based on an inventory of the priorities of the government, the TNO
innovation programmes and European themes. In the period 2011-2014, they are:
healthy living, water and climate, cultural and societal dynamics, sustainable
energy, connecting sustainable cities and materials: solutions for scarcity.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes, and led
one of them. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all four of
the existing initiatives: EDCTP, AAL, Eurostars and EMRP.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 105 ERA-Nets, of which 25 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in eight ERA-Net
Plus actions - of which five are still running - in areas with high European
added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Joint
research agendas and ERA-Net (Plus) networks form an important contribution to
international research collaboration. The Dutch government has announced that
EUR 150 million will be provided to strengthen fundamental research. A
substantial portion of this sum could be used to facilitate participation in
the European research programme, Horizon 2020. Also, the TKI supplement (EUR
101 million in 2014) will partially be used for co-financing EU projects.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has developed a specific policy, the bilateral agenda. The country
monitors the implementation of cooperation programmes.
Additionally,
NWO provides funding for several specific joint research projects for
international research collaborations with prioritised scientific disciplines.
In 2013, projects open for application were: Digging in the data challenge,
CoCoon, Conflict and Cooperation in the Management of Climate Change, Open
Research Area Plus – social sciences, collaboration with Brazil (CNPq, FAPESP),
collaboration with India – Intelligent Grids, Indo-Dutch science industry
collaboration – Computer Sciences, Social science collaboration: India-the
Netherlands, Science industry cooperation: the Netherlands-China/Hé programme
of innovation cooperation, collaboration with South-Africa: Astronomy and
enabling technologies for astronomy.
KNAW
has two large international collaboration programmes, with China and with Indonesia. Within these scientific collaborations, the following programmes are
currently open and have some predefined priorities or joint research agendas: 
•
Scientific cooperation with China-Programme of Strategic Scientific Alliances
(PSA), which is mainly for material sciences, biotechnology/drug research and
environmental science (EUR1.36 million per year);
•
Scientific Programme with Indonesia Netherlands (EUR10 million combined budget
from KNAW and NWO for the duration of the programme).
Some
of the competitive NWO- and KNAW, instruments support international research
collaboration as well. All the funding provided by these research councils is
subject to international peer-review assessment. NWO and KNAW also have several
collaboration agreements for supporting visits, joint workshops and research
projects, but without predefined priorities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in the Netherlands allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is similar
to the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of organisations'
research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
NWO has several programmes supporting international collaboration (joint
research agendas), researchers' mobility (Money follows researcher) and
international exchanges (Money follows cooperation), which involve Memoranda of
Understanding between the NWO and other research councils, and coordinated and
joint evaluation procedures following international peer-review standards (lead
agency approach, for example in the ORA Programme). 
There
is no information available about cross-border interoperability initiatives in
relation to reporting requirements, intellectual property rights (IPR), or on
specific provisions removing legal barriers/laws.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 83.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer
reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
the Netherlands allocated through peer review carried out by institutions
outside the country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
  Netherlands participates in the following large international research
infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO and ESRF. In 2012, the country
contributed 1.2 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the
European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory
(ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)
(Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 18 of them. The country
coordinates four of them: CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, LIFEWATCH and EATRIS.(37 %)
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures, the Netherlands is committed to funding seven of them. They
are: CLARIN-ERIC, ESSurvey, SHARE-ERIC, BBMRI,  KM3NeT, SKA, PRACE (ex HPC).
With
regards to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium,
the Netherlands is involved in six of the seven consortia that adopted the
legal framework designed by the European Commission to facilitate the
establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest,
which involve several European countries. The Netherlands is hosting SHARE-ERIC
(until early 2013, then to Germany), CLARIN ERIC and EATRIS ERIC, and is a
member of ESS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.
In
terms of support for the development and implementation of research
infrastructures, the Netherlands has contributed around EUR150 million since
2008 towards overall policy measures/strategies. The national roadmap on
research infrastructures which was published in 2008 and updated in 2013,
includes references as well as an appendix to the participation of The
Netherlands in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the
ESFRI roadmap. In fact, most of them are part of or related to ESFRI.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to Research infrastructures, among the research infrastructures
coordinated by The Netherlands, access to 26 of them has been funded by the
European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for the Netherlands in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Netherlands
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and the recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 58 447 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the Netherlands in 2011. This represents 6.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with
7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 153.8 in the Netherlands compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7.
In
2012, 63 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies were publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
In
the Netherlands, each institution is an autonomous employer with its own
personnel and recruitment policies and no legal instrument exists to influence
the autonomy of the institution. There is in some cases a statutory obligation
to publish a job vacancy on relevant national online platforms.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science provides the universities and large
companies with information about the ‘Charter & Code’ principles. The
Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) endorsed the principles
of the Charter & Code on behalf of all universities in the Netherlands.  Furthermore, the Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, the Maastricht University, Tilburg University, the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, the University of Amsterdam, the University of Twente and Utrecht University have signed the
Charter & Code as an individual organisation.
By
May 2011, 11 Dutch organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources (HR) Strategy for Researchers of which five had received the HR
Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter
& Code.
Clear
career development provisions are negotiated individually throughout the
recruitment process between the researchers and the university/public research
institute. Some universities offer researchers the possibility of a route to a
tenured position.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.9 in
2011, compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
2009 and 2010, the NWO developed a programme to strengthen the Dutch PhD system
at the request of the Minister for Education, Culture and Science, and in
collaboration with the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU)
and the KNAW. Following the advice of an evaluation committee on the design of
the first two rounds, the NWO decided to continue the graduate school
programme. The NWO graduate programme creates an excellent educational and
research environment for highly talented young researchers. It is a structural
programme that offers schools a funding opportunity for the appointment of four
PhD students. These PhDs form part of a school that, possibly in collaboration
with an educational establishment, provides a coherent educational and research
programme covering both the master’s and PhD routes.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship from another EU-27
Member State was 20.4 % in the Netherlands compared with 4.2 % among the
Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of
non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.9
% in the Netherlands compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference
group and an EU average of 24.2 %. 
The
government of the Netherlands does not provide funding for inward mobility,
including the return of Dutch researchers from abroad. The NWO runs bilateral
exchange programmes (for instance with Belgium, Germany, China, India, Japan,   South Korea, etc.) that encourage scientific collaboration and the mobility
of researchers. The NWO’s Rubicon Programme aims to stimulate young recently
graduated PhD students to acquire international experience. The programme
offers researchers, who have completed their doctorates in the previous year,
the chance to gain experience at a top research institution outside the Netherlands for a maximum period of two years.
Universities,
research institutions and industrial partners cooperate closely to create or
support different tools to develop partnerships between academia and industry.
For instance, the issue of encouraging researchers to move from the public to
the business sector and vice-versa has been embedded in the Strategic Agenda
for Higher Education and Science Policy and the National Innovation Strategy of
the Netherlands. An example of inter-sectoral mobility being encouraged as a
result of the Strategic Agenda and the National Innovation Strategy is the
Dutch government’s 'top sector policy', which aims to boost the innovation
climate and collaboration through the creation of public-private partnerships.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
Dutch Emancipation Policy (2013-2016) strives to enhance the empowerment of
girls and women and the emancipation of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and
transgender (LGBT). The participation of women in public research is not
explicitly addressed, but the need for gender balance in health care and health
research is acknowledged and a number of measures for this policy area
foreseen.
A
cultural and institutional change on gender is supported by initiatives like
Girls Day, the Charter Talent to the Top Foundation, and the Dutch Network for
Women Professors.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 98.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that
within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
In
the Netherlands, university boards and department chairs are responsible for
stimulating gender policies. Dutch universities attract international talent
and, according to the 2013 Innovation Union Scoreboard, the Dutch innovation
system is the most innovative among EU Member States (EC 2013b). More and more
research establishments have signed the Talent to the Top Charter, which had
initially been established for business enterprises.  
The
country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in
research programmes and/or projects. It has set up awards, fellowships and/or other
similar mechanisms to support specifically female researchers.
Both
the research councils NWO and KNAW run programmes devoted to encouraging women
to pursue an academic career. Although almost half of Dutch PhD graduates are
female, there are less women in higher academic functions. Gender equality in
research is actively supported by a variety of means (e.g. emancipation policy
grants, FOM bridging subsidies, Aspasia Programme, LEAP!).
The
NWO Plural Programme aims to move more women at Dutch universities to a
position as a lecturer in the area of Earth and Life Sciences (ALW).
Another
NWO grant (Aspasia) is intended to encourage the promotion of female Vidi grant
candidates to associate and full professorships. Aspasia ensures that more
female assistant professors progress to the level of associate or full
professor. Aspasia was set up together with the Ministry of Education, Culture
and Science, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU).
Athena
is a grant scheme intended for female researchers who have received a Veni
grant from NWO Chemical Sciences and the premium stimulates an appointment as
assistant professor in permanent employment. Athena encourages the appointment
of female researchers in chemistry at a university, or an equivalent fixed
position at a research institute.
KNAW
Merian Prize
A
prize for awarding a woman who will inspire others to embark on a career in
science or scholarship. The biennial prize is conferred on an outstanding
female researcher working alternately in the social sciences or humanities and
in science.
FOM-bridging
subsidies 
The
Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM) promotes, coordinates and
finances fundamental physics research in the Netherlands. It is an autonomous
foundation responsible to the physics division of the national research council
the NWO. Its annual budget is EUR 99,2 million. FOM supports the appointment of
a woman in permanent employment in physics, for example after having worked in
a university abroad or to bridge the wage gap between a lecturer and professor
position. FOM can subsidise up to five years. 
FOM/V
network initiatives for female physicists - Minerva Prize (FOM)
With
this scheme, the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM) encourages
the visibility of women in physics in order to encourage more women physicists
to remain in the scientific community. The Minerva Prize is one of the
activities under the Fom/v-stimuleringsprogramme to promote female physicists.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Gender
and women’s studies are taught at various Dutch universities and there is a
Netherlands Association for Women’s Studies.
ZonMW
(The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development), the division
for medical research of the NWO, has published ‘Kleurstof’: a document on
diversity issues in research (gender diversity but also diversity in terms of
ethnic background, age, etc.)
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision-making, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
Research (NWO) has defined targets for its own board and committees.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 32.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of gender-balanced
recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing
organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in the Netherlands is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access (OA), the current Dutch government supports the
principles of access to and dissemination of scientific information, but does
not intend to invest substantially in the furthering of open access and
preservation. In November 2013, a letter was sent by the Cabinet to Parliament
giving its vision on the further development of open access based upon the 'Golden Road'.  Nevertheless, access to (and preservation of) scientific information is being
ensured by a variety of initiatives. These include the establishment of the NWO
‘incentive Fund Open Access’, the KNAW’s open access policy and its Data
Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) initiative, the NARCIS scheme, and an
e-depot.
Related
to open access to publications, the national research council of the Netherlands
(NWO) encourages research results acquired with NWO funding to be accessible to
the public. It has an Incentive Fund Open Access, a pilot in the humanities for
starting open access journals, and has launched a call for proposals for all
disciplines served by NWO for starting open access journals. It should be noted
that NWO also co-finances OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks) –
a European project now turned into an organisation – focusing on open access
publishing of books.
In
the Netherlands, the scientific community and libraries are actively engaged in
developing policies for open access. All Dutch research universities have one
or more repositories, and from 2010, all articles by Dutch researchers in
Springer journals will be made available via Open Access. Since 2005, all Dutch
universities, the Netherlands Association of Universities of Applied Sciences,
the KNAW, NWO, the Royal Library and SURF have signed the Berlin Declaration on
open access to knowledge in the sciences and humanities.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 95.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support OA to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of publicly funded
scientific publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is
lower than that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.
DANS
(Data Archiving and Networked Services) encourages researchers to archive and
reuse data in a sustained manner, e.g. through the online archiving system
EASY. DANS also provides access, via NARCIS.nl, to thousands of scientific
datasets, e-publications and other research information in the Netherlands. In addition, the institute provides training and advice, and performs research
into sustained access to digital information. DANS ensures that access to
digital research data keeps improving. 
Research
Data Netherlands is a collaboration between DANS and the 3TU. A datacentre was
initiated in 2013.  Several universities and research institute have joined the
Dutch Dataverse Network (DDN), jointly managing the international open source
application Dataverse Network for archiving and opening up research data by the
researchers themselves.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 22.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support OA to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations making scientific research date systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, NARCIS (National Academic Research and Collaborations
Information System) provides access to scientific information including (open
access) publications from the repositories of all the Dutch universities, KNAW,
NWO and a number of research institutes, and datasets from some data archives,
as well as descriptions of research.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, the Netherlands has developed a Knowledge transfer strategy.
It fosters an open circulation of knowledge between companies and research
organisations and is implemented as follows. Following a EUR80 million subsidy
programme, which has ended, knowledge transfer or, more broadly, valorisation
is considered now as an integral part of the mission of Dutch higher education
institutions as laid down in Dutch law (‘Third mission'). This is illustrated
by the increased number of staff working in related activities and knowledge
transfer capacities, which are increasingly acknowledged and rewarded in the
human resources policies of the institutions. Furthermore, in the performance
agreements between the government and the HEIs as agreed in autumn 2012,
valorisation appears as one of the priorities. The implementation of the
strategy is accompanied by a monitoring system. Funding organisations have
specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer.
Funding
organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities,
a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programme. The NWO
institutes have set up an Industrial Liaison Officers Network (ILO-net) where
they regularly organise company contact days to encouraging collaboration
between industry, government and civic society organisations.
Strategic
partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in the Netherlands. The Top Sector approach (part of the Enterprise Policy) has exacerbated the
public-private cooperation, which used to be fragmented and temporarily
financed between entrepreneurs, researchers and government. An example of a
relevant measure is the Top Consortia for Knowledge and Innovation (TKI). TKIs
were established in 2012 to coordinate and match public-private research, which
includes the creation of linkages with European research programmes (such as
Horizon 2020). Top Sectors also strategically collaborate in human capital
agendas, better regulation and economic diplomacy, involving regional and local
governments, thus building and maintaining a comprehensive, multilevel agenda
for competitiveness and innovation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 72.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and
support national support to KT, OI, technology transfer offices (TTOs) and
private-public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is similar to
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research personnel
whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation with the implementation of Digital ERA, the Netherlands has not set up
a strategy for its implementation. However, the country has implemented a
research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.
The
usage of e-infrastructures is supported through the creation of SURF. SURF is a
foundation for ground-breaking innovations in information and communication
technologies (ICT), allowing researchers and higher education institutions to
make optimal use of the potential of ICT and improve their quality. In
accordance with the government's response to the advice by ICTRegie on ICT
research, funds are made available for ICT-infrastructure such as computer
networks (SURFnet, GigaPort), e-Science and high-performance computing.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and
premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research
collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant
cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Netherlands
was a member of an identity federation in both 2011 and 2013. The country is a
member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 34 research performing organisations in Netherlands answered the 2014
ERA survey, which represents 34.3% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Netherlands shows that 50.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA
compliant’ cluster, 46.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’
cluster and 3.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’
cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of
researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the
shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 88.2 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster,
11.7 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.1 % for those
organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.
Three
large technical universities did not reply to the survey, which diminishes the
representativeness of the results of the research performance organisations.
For
the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it
should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by ministries
without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence the
percentage is relatively high compared to official figures.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Intensifying budget for fundamental research || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015 (updated March 2014) || 2014 || X || X 
 Additional funds for fundamental research || 2013 || X || X 
 Competitive funding programs for research and innovation (NWO, KNAW and Agentschap NL) || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Improving the quality and profiles of Higher Education institutions || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Joint Research Projects Bio-based Economy ||   ||   ||   
 Co-funding for participation in European research programmes || 2013 || X || X 
 Top Sectors: 2013 update of innovation contracts || 2013 || X || X 
 Participation in Joint Programming, article 185 initiative, ERA NET+ || 2013 || X || X 
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions 
 Bilateral agenda ||   ||   ||   
 NWO and KNAW programmes for international collaboration ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 NWO cooperation in research themes || 2013 || X || X 
 SME Innovation scheme topsectors || 2013 || X || X 
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Dutch roadmap for large scale research facilities || 2013 || X || X 
 Update ESFRI roadmap || 2013 || X || X 
 Attractive careers 
 NWO Talent Scheme (Vernieuwingsimpuls) and other individual grant schemes ||   ||   ||   
 Measures to develop ERA in relation to HR Strategy for Researchers ||   ||   ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 Emancipation policy 2013-2016 || 2013 || X || X 
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 NWO Aspasia Programme ||   ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 towards Golden open access in 2024 || 2013 || X || X 
 NARCIS - National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System ||   ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 TKI surcharge || 2013 || X || X 
 MBO Centres for Innovative craftsmanship, HBO Centers for entrepreneurs, RAAK programme || 2013 || X || X 
 "Technology Pact" to address skills shortages in technology || 2013 || X || X 
 MKB Innovation Scheme for Top Sectors (MIT) || 2013 || X || X 
 Valorisation and knowledge transfer by Higher Education institutions and NWO || 2012 || X ||   
 High Tech start up Fund || 2011 ||   ||   
 Technical Pact || 2013 || X || X 
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
The
Polish public research and development (R&D) sector went through major
changes that result from numerous legislative acts adopted in 2010 (science
reform) and 2011 (higher education reform) – altogether eight laws and 92
ordinances. They establish new institutions and rules. The Ministry of Science
and Education (MNiSW) manages the science budget and supervises two key funding
agencies: the National Science Centre (NCN), financing basic science projects,
and the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBiR), financing applied
research and innovative development. The MNiSW is assisted by the Committee for
Science Policy (KPN) for priority setting and the Committee for Evaluation of
Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN), evaluating the performance of public
sector research performing organisations. The Polish Agency for Enterprise
Development (PARP) is an agency under the Ministry of Economy (MG), which
distributes Structural Funds under the MG, but also other innovation-related
measures. The Ministry of Regional Development (MRR) defines the policies and
regulations related to the absorption of EU funds. Several other ministries have
dedicated programmes, stimulating innovation and funding research projects in
relevant sectors. The Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) is a non-governmental
institution, partly funded from the science budget, the EU Structural Funds and
other sources, that award research grants and scholarships.    
In
2011, 105 public higher education institutions (PHEIs) and 207 public research
organisations (PROs) were actively conducting R&D activities as well as the
  Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN).
Since
2013, Poland has had a multi-annual research development and innovation (RDI)
plan  –  The Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for
the years 2012-2020 'Dynamic Poland' – coordinated by the Ministry of Economy.
The strategy is the highest level policy document related to RDI in Poland and sets quantifiable objectives in R&D funding, indicators to measure their
fulfilment and delegates specific tasks to different governmental institutions.
Among the R&D objectives listed are: adjust the structure and increase the
effectiveness of public research expenditure in RDI; develop  international
scientific and educational cooperation; develop infrastructure for research and
knowledge transfer; support researchers’ mobility in the science and economy sectors;
create a culture of innovative academic entrepreneurship; strengthen links
between business and academia; use intellectual property rights, patents and
scientific information effectively.         
The
National Research Programme 'Foundations for the science and technology policy
and innovation policy of the state' (NRP) that was issued in 2011 has set
all-encompassing national R&D priorities.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Poland represented EUR 36 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28).  In 2012, total
GBAORD corresponded to 0.8 % of total government expenditures and 0.4% of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Poland has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D
efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has
evolved positively in Poland even when it regressed at EU28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
Act on principles of science financing (2010) established financing modalities
for NCN and NCBiR, assuring gradual increases in the allocated funding for
competitive calls. The share of competitive, project base funding has increased
from 44.63% in 2009 to a planned 63.79% in 2012 and 63.71% in 2013. In 2013, the
ten programmes managed by NCN and the 23 programmes managed by NCBiR were
distributing 54.25% of the science budget through open competitive calls.
Besides those agencies, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW),
the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) and the Polish Agency for Enterprise
Development (PARP) run five and respectively four and four research programmes.
The NCBiR as well as the PARP fund research enterprises.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 92 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
National
peer review is used by all the funders (NCN, NCBiR, MNiSW, FNP and PARP) and
peer-review rules are defined by legislation or publicly available procedures
and are compliant with international standards for peer-reviews. For NCN, the
principles for excellence, impartiality, appropriateness for purpose/impact, as
well as efficiency and speed,  are applied. The NCN also involves foreign
reviewers in the evaluation of selected proposals. Transparency is a principle
embedded in the Act on the principles for Science Funding, to be applied for
all research funding organisations.            
The
reliance on the core principles of peer-review is also required for all R&D
funding that is distributed based on the Operational Programme 'Smart Growth'
(POIR), in the framework of the distribution of the EU Structural Funds for
2014-2020.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is partly statutory (based on the number of researchers) and partly the
result of an evaluation. In 2012, The MNiSW amended the standards for the
institutional assessment of public R&D organisations (both universities and
research institutes), promoting internationally significant research and the
successful commercialisation of research results. Nationwide performance
evaluations are managed by the newly established, independent Committee for
Evaluation of Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN) and are based on transparent,
pre-defined criteria. The detailed assessments include bibliometric measures
(with numbers of publications taking into account impact factors of specific
academic journals), scientific awards to researchers, patents, revenues from
industry co-operation (such as commercialisation of research results) and
external R&D funding, normalised by the numbers of R&D employees in an
organisation. The first institutional evaluation using the new criteria was
performed in 2013. The institutional assessments are carried out at the level
of individual institutes and faculties. Among the 963 scientific institutions
evaluated, 3.8% received the highest “A+” rank, and 31.9% were assigned to “A”
category, while B- and C-ranked organisations will benefit from only limited institutional
funding. It is planned that institutes classified in category C will be
liquidated, commercialised or merged into other institutes. The next evaluation
is planned to take place in 2017 with using new criteria tha are planned to be
proposed in 2015-16, which will also involve researchers in the revision
process.  
The
MNiSW develops a nationwide online system POL-ON, which will make the results
of institutional assessments publicly available alongside the bibliometric
indicators.        
The
Ministry has also set rules for selecting leading research institutions in each
scientific discipline, the so-called KNOWs – National Leading Scientific
Centres. The KNOW status (Centres of Excellence) is linked to an assessment
exercise conducted every five years that evaluate research results, the
relationship between the teaching process and the socio-economic environment,
as well as a full financial report. The selected centres receive additional
funding. This measure is reinforced by the 2014 National Reform Programme.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
The
Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years
2012-2020 'Dynamic Poland' includes among its R&D objectives the
development of international scientific and educational cooperation. The
National Research Programme contains a list of priority areas partially
coinciding with the grand challenges. These are reflected in the Strategic
Research and Development Programmes of NCBiR and the Resolution of the Council
of NCN concerning priority areas for fundamental research. In 2013, a dedicated
inter-disciplinary committee was set up to make recommendations on how funds
for international research cooperation should be distributed by the MNiSW,
while the R&D funding agencies NCN and NCBiR have had corresponding
institutional arrangements since 2010. The future Operational Programme
"Smart Growth" (POIR), which defines the rules for distributing the
EU Structural Funds during the 2014-2020 period, includes measures to foster
the internationalisation of Polish science through support for the creation of
international research agendas and to stimulate cross-border R&D.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Poland allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Poland dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between the institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third
countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7), the share of Poland's participation in the total participation
is 1.9 % and the country received 1.1 % of the total European Commission
contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 10 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR
72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.4 % of the Gross Domestic
Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data)
(the EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in seven of the ten
ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer),
Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global
change: A new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The
Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An
emerging threat to human health and Water Challenges for a Changing world.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 61 ERA-Nets, of which 15 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in nine ERA-Net Plus
actions - of which six are still running - in areas with high European added value
and received additional EU financial support to top up their joint call for
proposals.
Poland
has bilateral research agreements and cooperation programmes with the Czech Republic,  Germany (Polish-German Foundation for Science), Israel, Luxembourg (Pollux programme) and Norway (Polish-Norwegian Research Fund). Funding within bilateral
agreements is offered via the NCN and NCBiR dedicated programmes (e.g.
HARMONIA).           
The
Visegrad fund (between the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia) also provides research grants from a 'common pot' contribution from all the
countries involved.            
Cross-border
interoperability of national programmes is based on the Act on the principles
of science financing (2010). There are standard procedures for co-funding
Polish researchers from academia or industry to participate in international
initiatives and using international peer review in national funding decisions.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. Poland has bilateral agreements
with Singapore and Taiwan (with the co-funding managed by the NCBiR).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Poland allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU
ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards
is illustrated by the programme "Ideas Plus", established by the
MNiSW in 2010 and supporting the participants of the European Research Council
(ERC) competition 'IDEAS', who did not qualify for funding from the ERC.    
It
seems that the recent 2013 call for proposals for the POLLUX 'Innovation in
Services' within the bilateral agreement with Luxembourg is based on a joint
peer review evaluation process.     
No
funders apply the so called 'lead agency' procedures, i.e. the 'Money
cooperation' and 'Money follows researchers' schemes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 88.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Poland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is
higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Poland
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
ESA, CERN, EFDA, ESRF, EU.XFEL and ILL. In 2012, the country contributed 2.5 %
of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology
Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European
Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the
European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 21 of them (42 %).
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures, Poland is committed to funding four of them. They are: CLARIN,
ESSurvey, XFEL and FAIR.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Poland is involved in four of the nine consortia, which adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries. Poland is a member of CLARIN ERIC and ES Survey ERIC, and
an observer in BBMRI ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures (RIs), the highest level policy document, the Strategy for the
Innovation and Efficiency of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 (2013) (SIEG)
listed as one of the objectives the further development of RIs based on the
Polish Roadmap of Research Infrastructure (PMDIB). Already in 2010 the Act on
the principles of science financing established open competitive calls for
large R&D infrastructure investments. Additionally, several ordinances of
the Minister of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) (2010-2011) earmarked
parts of the science budget for RIs, defined investment criteria and, selection
modes involving peer-reviews, and opened up the competitions to business
enterprises as well. 
The
MNiSW published the updated Polish Roadmap for Research Infrastructures in
August 2014. The new roadmap includes 53 research projects, among which 30 are
national projects and 23 are international ones, whilst 13 are already in their
implementation phase. According to the MNiSW, the inclusion of the research
projects in the Roadmap does not involve any financial commitment from public
authorities. Moreover, no information on financial commitment is mentioned in
the updated roadmap.
The
2014 National Reform Programme considers the establishment of research and
innovation infrastructures, especially those of European interest, among its
priorities. One of the implementing measures it announces is a draft
legislative amendment adopted by the MNiSW to ensure more efficient financing
of strategic research infrastructures, in line with the ERA actions and based
on PMDIB. The draft amendment is expected to be adopted by the autumn of 2014.           
In
the future POIR for 2014-2020, several measures address infrastructure
investments, including dedicated funding for projects from the PMDIB with
explicit requirements to ensure the availability of the funded RI to other
organisations, and to prepare financial plans, taking into account the costs of
set-up and maintenance, as well as the expected fees charged to external users.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to research infrastructures, the existing legal framework does
not prevent foreign researchers from using the RIs in Poland. The POIR includes measures that would help optimise the use of existing Ris for
applied research and development, especially jointly with business enterprises
and international partners. Funding for Ris included in the national roadmap
(PMDIB) requires that external access is facilitated, with clearly defined access
policies and fees.
The
MNiSW provides an exhaustive list on its website of the ESFRI projects
implemented in Poland. In the meantime, the MNiSW continues the development of
an online system POL-ON, which will publish detailed information about
scientific organisations, including the availability of research
infrastructures. In 2013, the NCBiR published legal interpretations online and
offered tools that facilitate the commercial uses of publicly-funded Ris.
Access to one the research infrastructures coordinated by Poland has been funded by the European Commission.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Poland in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Poland_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 64 133 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Poland in 2011. This represents 3.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with 5.3
among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 143.2 in Poland, compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7. 
In
2012, 62% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
Law on Higher Education of 2011 requires Polish higher education institutions
to publish job vacancies on the EURAXESS portal. A provision in the amended Law
also states that all scientific posts in HEIs must be filled via a competition
(Article 118a). This facilitates scientists’ careers and enables young
scientists to have better access to grants (from the National Science Centre
and the National Centre for Research and Development) through open
competitions. Experts from both national and foreign science centres are able
to participate in the competitions.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Polish government actively promotes the implementation of the ‘Charter &
Code’ by research institutions and funders. By May 2014, 7 Polish organisations
were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of
which 4 had received the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in
implementing the Charter & Code.
In
2011, the Polish government adopted the Long-Term Financial Plan for 2011-2014,
which provides for a 30% salary increase for higher education employees,
including researchers, over a three-year period, starting from 2013.
The
number of older scientists strongly outnumbers young highly qualified
researchers, preventing the latter from climbing the academic career ladder.
This results in an outflow of young scientists from HE institutions and makes
it hard for Polish science to compete with the best global centres. One of the
changes introduced in the amended Law on Higher Education (2011) is a
regulation stating that the contract of a nominated academic teacher must
expire when they turn 65. The age limit for professors is 70.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.5 in
2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
Polish government introduced a financial incentive to provide more funding to
around 30% of doctoral candidates. Doctoral programmes are evaluated by the
Polish Accreditation Committee as part of an institutional assessment. The
procedures for obtaining the doctoral degree have been made more transparent
and quality-oriented. Measures to improve researchers’ competencies and skills,
particularly those of young researchers, are included in the long-term Poland
2030 Strategy, the National Development Strategy 2020 as well as in the Human
Capital Development Strategy adopted in June 2013.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 1.7% in Poland compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.9% in Poland compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2% (Researchers' Report, 2014).
The
Foundation for Polish Science has a number of schemes to support inward
mobility. The overall objective of the welcome Programme is to engage
outstanding researchers from abroad in creating research teams in Poland and intensify the degree of international cooperation of Polish institutes and
universities. The projects must be of at least three years’ envisaged duration.
The objective of the homing plus Programme is to encourage young Polish
scholars abroad to return to Poland. The programme is also open to young
Doctors of Philosophy (PhDs) who are citizens of other countries but interested
in taking up a post-doctoral fellowship in Poland. The project carried out
under the programme may last from one to two years.
As
prominent scientists and the best laboratories are dispersed all over the
country, Poland needs science centres where the knowledge and  appropriate
funding are clustered in order to raise the level of Polish science and to
compete internationally. Leading National Research Centres (KNOWs) have existed
since 2012 to fulfil this role, bringing together the best scientists, students
and doctoral candidates. The KNOWs were selected via a competition in eight
knowledge and education areas: liberal arts, social studies, science, technical
studies, medical and health-related studies, life sciences, agriculture and
forestry, and art. They receive five-year subsidies and are autonomous in
deciding how to spend the money, e.g. on salaries or by establishing special
doctoral grants. In July 2013, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education
announced a competition for the next group to receive additional funding and
KNOW status. The results of the competition will be announced in 2014.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
basis of equality for women and men in Poland is the principle of equality
before the law, which is embedded in the Polish Constitution. The main
institution for gender equality is the Department for Women, Family and
Counteracting Discrimination in the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, which
has operated since 1 January 2006.            
General
legislative acts prohibit discrimination and protect women during their period
of pregnancy and maternity leave. Recently, the government published a proposal
to amend the Labour Code and the Act on financial benefits from social
insurance in the case of sickness and maternity (2013). In 2013, it also
introduced measures on flexitime, paid parental leave, child-care facilities
and returning to work after bringing-up a child, as well as support and
financial contributions to projects promoting equal opportunities for working
men and women.     
Additionally,
the 2014 National Reform Programme promises to reinforce measures such as
maternity and parental leave and provision of child-care facilities, and
fostering a work-life balance and career progression in order to raise the
employability of women.
In
the research field, Poland has specific legal and soft measures in place to
promote gender equality. Poland belongs to the EU countries with traditionally
high proportions of women involved in R&D activities. In 2011, 65.5 % of
all university graduates were women, including 51.5 % of new doctorate
graduates. Women make up 22.05 % of all the professors employed in Poland and
out of 524 members of the Polish Academy of Sciences, in 2011 only 20 (3.81 %)
were women.            
In
January 2014, the Minister of Science and Higher Education issued a statement,
confirming the importance of gender-related research and linking it to the
Polish and EU legal framework. The Central Statistics Office (GUS) monitors
gender balance at national level and many public sector R&D institutions
publish corresponding data in their annual reports.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 61.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
In
2012, female researchers represented 42.1 % of the recruitments in the higher
education sector and 20.3 % of academics in Grade A. This is slightly above the
EU average (18.7 %).
The
country has measures supporting a return to work after parental leave. In the
science and higher education field, the recruitment, retention and career
progression of female researchers is fostered by several measures: fixed-term
contracts are extended by the periods of maternity leave and additional leave
to raise children; doctoral studies are prolonged under the same conditions;
the annual workloads of women giving birth and raising children are reduced.
Article 28 of the 2010 Law on the principles of financing science stipulates
that a grant or scholarship can be interrupted during a period of maternity or
parental leave. Periods of maternity leave and leave for taking care of
children are not included in the calculation of maximum age for grants for
young researchers for the NCN and NCBiR's programme LIDER. The Foundation for
Polish Science runs the ‘Parent-bridge programme’, which aims to enable
researchers who are raising young children to return to advanced research work
as well as to enable pregnant women to carry out research projects which are
financed from external sources.      
In
  Poland there are awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to
support specifically female researchers. Several soft measures are put in place
to foster cultural and institutional change on gender. The Conference of
Rectors of Polish Technical Universities manages a programme called 'Girls on
technical universities', compiles lists of 'women-friendly' technical
universities, thus establishing dedicated contact points for women. The MNiSW
in cooperation with the magazine Elle offers financial awards 'Girls of the
future' for outstanding female researchers. L’Oréal, with the support of
UNESCO, offers scholarships for women-scientists.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Gender
mainstreaming in the contexts of research projects is not actively promoted,
but multiple research programmes include the topic alongside a long list of
potential research areas in social studies, without earmarking funds
specifically for this particular area. Dedicated gender studies are available
at, among others, the University of Warsaw and the Polish Academy of Sciences.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Poland who responded to the survey did not provide
information on support to the inclusion of gender dimension in research
content/programmes.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, Article 48 of the Law on Higher Education
stipulates that the minister for higher education makes sure that at least 30 %
of the members of the Polish Accreditation Committee are women. The Law obliges
the Committee to strive to ensure a gender balance in its work, among others
that there should be a balanced representation of women on the Main Council of
Science and Higher Education and the Central Committee for Scientific Degrees
and Titles.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 16.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Poland is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the NCBiR model agreement makes open access
mandatory. Additionally, several measures have been put in place by the MNiSW
to guarantee open access for Polish researchers and students to a variety of
research results: gold open access publications in Springer's journals; licence
for the Virtual Library of Science; digitisation of scientific journals and
their electronic distribution. In 2012, the MNiSW defined criteria and
modalities for evaluation of Polish scientific journals: these journals get
extra points if they publish contents of articles online.             
Additionally,
patented inventions can be used for scientific, non-commercial research without
the need to license the invention or pay royalties.       
The
future POIR includes support to adjustments of ICT infrastructure, which is
necessary to enable open access to scientific publications in Poland.
The
NCBiR model agreement requires publications to be made available via open
access – either green with deposition in repositories or gold, as the costs of
publication covered by most R&D support programmes. The same model
agreement also requires software to be free or open source.   
Index
Copernicus offers basic access to data free of charge.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 73 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
No
policy measures supporting open access to data have been identified.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 73 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
As
regards repositories, the Federation of Digital Libraries, which is managed by
the by Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC) archives, digitises
the contents of Polish libraries, including scanned scientific publications.
The Virtual Library of Science, established in 2010, aggregates commercial
publication databases into a common platform. Additionally, the Centre of Open
Science CeON (managed by the University of Warsaw) also maintains open access
repositories, including books, and offers legal advice on open access.          
Additionally,
an ongoing project called 'Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific
and Scientific Technical Information (SYNAT)', funded by the NCBiR and
developed by the University of Warsaw and Warsaw University of Technology, will
establish an open repository of scientific publications and data for all
researchers and institutions in Poland to use.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private
sectors, Poland stresses the importance of knowledge transfer and cooperation
between scientific institutions and industry and supports open innovations in
the overall Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for
the years 2012-2020 (2013) and its implementing Enterprise Development
Programme (PRP).    
Several
legislative acts set relevant rules regarding intellectual property rights
(IPR) for both universities and research institutes, and include the
possibility or obligation to commercialise publicly funded research results,
encourage the establishment and use of academic spin-offs, oblige universities
to set up technology transfer entities and include performance in commercial
knowledge transfer as part of the institutional assessments for R&D
organisations. Additionally, the MNiSW and the Polish Enterprise Agency have
published several guidelines related to knowledge transfer.           
The
POIR and the 'Operational Programme "Innovative Economy' (POIG) include
measures to stimulate the cooperation between business and scientific organisations,
such as building of mixed consortia and internships/secondments from business
to academia; centralising funds for enterprises in a single agency and changes
in the application and evaluation procedure of grants.           
The
2014 National Reform Programme includes business-academia cooperation as one of
its main priorities. There are several programmes in the field of applied
research and development (BRIdge VC, BroTech, Innovation Creator, LIDER, PBS,
BLUE GAS, GEKON, INNOMED, INNOLOT, CuBR), strategic programmes (STRATEGMED,
BIOSTRATEG, Modern material technologies) and programmes supporting the process
of commercialisation of the results of R&D activities for economic purposes
(Graf-Tech, InnoTech, Spin-Tech, Start-Tech), which were already implemented or
are prepared for implementation during the 2014–2020 period. Most of these
programmes are financed under the NCBiR.
The
MNiSW also manages programmes for training personnel in technology transfer
offices (TTOs) and hiring technology brokers for public universities (for
example through programmes such as TOP 500 Innovators and 'Brokers of
Innovation'). It has also published several guidebooks on the topic.
Strategic
partnerships between academia and industry are supported by the NCBiR through
sectoral programmes such as INNOMED and INNOLOT (for the specific sectors of
medicine and aviation) but there are also horizontal, bottom-up programmes to
establish joint research agendas.
Within
the framework of the European Semester cycle, the European Commission highlighted
in the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation the need for Poland to strengthen the links between research, innovation and industrial policy.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 61.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 63.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 52.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Poland has not set up a strategy
for its implementation. However, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education
proposed amendments to the Act on science financing which foresee the future
integration of ICT systems. These would in turn support information sharing
about institutions, research projects and researchers.         
Through
the Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC), which is affiliated
with the Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry at the Polish Academy of Sciences
the country has implemented a research and education network, which is
essential to make digital services possible.            
The
POIR intends to fund the development of ICT infrastructures that are needed for
open access to scientific publications.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides cloud services and premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Poland
was a member of an identity federation in 2011 through the Poznan
Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC) The country is member of eduGAIN, a
service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to
identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus)
partners' federations. It operates PIONIER – the Polish Optical Internet
network.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 54 research performing organisations in Poland answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 22.2% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Poland shows that 35.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 59.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 5.6 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 69.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 27.7 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 2.4 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National Smart Specialisations || 2013 || X || X 
 The Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 “Dynamic Poland” || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 National Research Program “Foundations for the science and technology policy and innovation policy of the state” || 2011 ||   ||   
 NCN, NCBiR, Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW), the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) and Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PARP) programmes ||   ||   ||   
 Peer-review in national programmes || 1991 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Regional Development concerning the award of financial support based on the Operating Programme Innovative Economy, 2007-2013, by the Polish Agency of Enterprise Development (PARP) || 2012 || X ||   
 Act on National Research & Development Centre (NCBiR) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Act on National Science Centre (NCN) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Act on principles of science financing (modified in 2010) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Director of NCBiR concerning the principles of selection and compensation of experts at NCBiR Resolution of the NCN Counil concerning establishment and modalities of work of the panel of experts || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Institutional assessment by the Committee for Evaluation of Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN) ||   ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the conditions and modes of applying for the status of KNOW (National Leading Scientific Institution) Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the call f || 2011 ||   ||   
 Act on higher education (including amendments from 2011) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions of programme and institutional assessment || 2011 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 JPIs, EIROs, Artile 185, ERA-NETs - participation of Poland ||   ||   ||   
 Amendment to the Ordinance of the Minister of Economy amending the ordinance concerning financial support offered by the Polish Agency of Enterprise Development linked to operational programs || 2011 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the conditions and modes of awarding public support for financing international scientific cooperation || 2011 ||   ||   
 Resolution of the Council of NCN concerning priority areas for fundamental research The Strategic Research and Development Programs of NCBiR || 2012 || X ||   
 Polish participation in LIFE+ || 2008 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 The Visegrad Fund ||   ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the criteria and mode of award and settlement of funds for financing international scientific co-operation || 2011 ||   ||   
 NCN's program "HARMONIA" || 2010 ||   ||   
 Bilateral agreements ||   ||   ||   
 Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the establishment of Program "Ideas Plus" || 2010 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Development of online system POL-ON || 2011 ||   ||   
 Polish Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (updated) || 2014 || X || X 
 Ordinances of the Minister of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) (2010-2011) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Legal interpretations supporting use of publicly funded RIs || 2013 || X || X 
 Draft Operational Programme "Innovative Economy" (POIG) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Operations of 10 EURAXESS Service Points in 10 different cities in Poland || 2011 ||   ||   
 Establishment of EURAXESS POLAND portal || 2009 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Draft Operational Programme "Human Capital " ||   ||   ||   
 Scientific Visa package ||   ||   ||   
 The Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the documentation of studies; Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions of programme assessment and institutional assessment (2011) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning recognition of foreign scientific degrees, and titles in the area of arts || 2011 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning doctoral studies and doctoral scholarships || 2011 ||   ||   
 Endorsement of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers by Polish Academy of Sciences || 2008 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Code of a researcher’s ethics || 2012 || X ||   
 Polish Labour Code Act on the implementation of some regulations of the European Union concerning equal treatment (2010) Act on financial benefits from social insurance in the case of sickness and maternity (2013) || 2010 ||   ||   
 L`Oreal Polska Grants ||   ||   ||   
 The Act on scientific degrees and scientific title and titles in the area of arts (amendments from 2011) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions for work remuneration and award of other work-related benefits for employees of public higher education institutes || 2011 ||   ||   
 Awards "Girls of the future" || 2009 ||   ||   
 Programme "Girls on technical universities" || 2008 ||   ||   
 NCBiR Programme LIDER || 2010 ||   ||   
 Programme 'BRIDGE' || 2010 ||   ||   
 Polish-Norwegian Research Programme ||   ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Draft guidelines of the amendments to the Act on science financing (2012) ||   ||   ||   
 DRIVER initiative ||   ||   ||   
 Virtual Library of Science || 2010 ||   ||   
 Centre of Open Science CeON || 2012 || X ||   
 Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education establishing programme 'Index Plus' || 2011 ||   ||   
 Index Copernicus || 2006 ||   ||   
 SYNAT -        Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific and Scientific Technical Information ||   ||   ||   
 Act on Industrial Property Rights || 2000 ||   ||   
 Springer's open choice programme || 2010 ||   ||   
 Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the establishment of National Programme for the Development of Humanities || 2010 ||   ||   
 Model agreement for applied research projects, funded by National Research & Development Centre (NCBiR) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Amendment to the Act on higher education || 2013 || X || X 
 The NCBiR Programme “BRIdge Mentor” || 2013 || X || X 
 The NCBiR Innovation Creator Programme || 2008 ||   ||   
 The Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the criteria and modes of awarding scientific ranks to scientific organisations || 2012 || X ||   
 Draft Operational Programme 'Smart Growth' (POIR) ||   ||   ||   
 The GRAF-TECH Programme The BLUE – GAS POLISH SHALE Gas Programme || 2011 ||   ||   
 The  NCBiR Programme "BRIdge VC" || 2013 || X || X 
  The NCBiR Programme "SPIN-TECH" || 2012 || X ||   
 Program 'Innovation Brokers' || 2013 || X || X 
 Program 'Top 500 Innovators Science - Management - Commercialisation' || 2011 ||   ||   
 Enterprises Development Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 INNOTECH programme IniTech programme || 2013 || X || X 
 The NCBiR Programmes: LIDER Programme; KadTech Programme; DEMONSTRATOR+ Programme ||   ||   ||   
 'Commercialisation of B+R for practitioners' (Komercjalizacja B+R dla praktyków) - KT guidelines by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education || 2010 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center (PSNC) || 1993 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
On
the policy level, research and innovation policies are the responsibility of
the Prime Minister’s office, which is advised by the National Council for
Science and Technology and the main ministries in charge of supporting research
and development (RD): the Ministry for Education and Science and the Ministry
for the Economy. The Ministry for Education and Science (MES) is responsible
for designing and implementing research policies, for the development of
international research cooperation activities and for producing R&D
statistics. Other sectorial ministries also allocate funds to R&D, but
their importance in R&D funding is not comparable.
On
the operational level, Portugal has operational programmes financing the
research system together with the major executive agencies, notably the
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia or Foundation for Science and Technology
(FCT) that operates as a research council. The FCT is the public agency
responsible for implementing the Portuguese Science and Technology government
policy. Its mission consists of promoting the advancement of scientific and
technological knowledge in Portugal, exploring opportunities that become
available in any scientific or technological domain to attain the highest
international standards in the creation of knowledge, and to stimulate their
diffusion and contribution to improve education, health, environment, and the
quality of life and wellbeing of the general public.
At
the research performers' level, there are several agencies that perform R&D
activities, namely the academic R&D units and the public laboratories. The
majority of the scientific research in Portugal takes place in R&D
institutions financed and evaluated regularly by the FCT. Currently there are
293 R&D units and 26 associate laboratories, where more than 22 000
researchers are given the opportunity to perform research, and who have  a
central role in both advancing research and national development, while
establishing their institutions as international centres of excellence to
address issues of national and global relevance.
The
country has not adopted a national strategy for research and innovation.
The
FCT developed a diagnosis of the national research and innovation system in
2013, which has contributed to the development of the Portuguese National
Strategy for Research and Innovation for Smart Specialisation, which
articulates national and regional levels and will be launched soon.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Portugal represented EUR148 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the
GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 151. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 2
% of total government expenditures and 0.9 % of gross domestic product (GDP)
(Eurostat). 
Since
2007, the business sector has become the most important actor in the R&D
system, with a share of 47 % in the national gross domestic expenditures on
R&D (GERD) in 2012. In 2001, when R&D expenditure was still at 0.85 %
of GDP, the public sector’s share in R&D funding was 61 % and the business
sector’s share was only 32 %. Most funding from the business sector (98.2 %)
was for its own use. Funds coming from abroad were dispersed through the
different types of R&D performers.
The
resources under the category 'abroad' included EUR 411 million from the EU
Framework Programme but did not include EU Structural Funds for research, which
are channelled through the government budget. European Structural and
Investment (ESI) Funds provided EUR 307 million in the 2007-2013 period. But if
the broader domain of 'Research, innovation and entrepreneurship' is
considered, which includes several other themes related to research activities
together with the information society measures, support for specialised
business services, technology transfer and advanced training, the amount of
earmarked funds is EUR 5 189 million.
The
FCT is the main research-funding agency (in charge of 31 % of the total R&D
budget) and in 2013 the FCT invested EUR 423.8 million in science and research.
The FCT provided the following funding: to research projects (with around 2 300
active projects and funding of about EUR 90 million p.a.); to career
development with the aim of recruiting 1 000 outstanding researchers by 2016
(EUR 47 million p.a. provided through several programmes); to supporting around
10 000 PhD students, post-doctoral researchers and researchers at other stages
in their career through scholarships, (EUR 160 million p.a.);  to funding 293
R&D units and 26 associate laboratories (EUR 56 million p.a.) where
approximately 22 000 researchers work; to international cooperation agreements
(EUR 44 million p.a.); to the online scientific library b-on, and the
management and operation of the Science Technology and Society Network (EUR 13 million
p.a.); to scientific meetings, publications, travel grants and to the public
understanding of science (EUR 8 million p.a.). All these figures are averages
for 2011-2013 and provided by the FCT.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
funding is allocated through the FCT.
The
share of research funding allocated on a competitive basis has been on the rise
in Portugal over recent years. However, delays in publishing calls for research
projects and also the fact that the decisions on funding these projects have
been delayed has led to a shrinking of the share of funding associated with
project-based competitive funding. 
The
following are examples of measures where a competitive allocation of funding
applies: 
•           The
2010 Regulation of access to scientific research and technology development
(RTD) funding sets the general conditions of access and allocation of funding
to projects financed by the FCT;
•           The
R&D projects, managed and implemented by the FCT since 2000, consist of
competitive calls that are open to all disciplinary areas;
•           The
R&D Units consist of incentives for business firms to create R&D units
aiming at enhancing the productivity, competitiveness and integration into the
global market;
•           The
2012 Incentive Programme aims at stimulating national research institutions to
raise extra funding outside the scope of the FCT funding. Specifically, it
awards an extra 30 % to competitive contracts of research institutions stemming
from national or international funding or from business companies and it awards
an extra 70 % in relation to contracts stemming from the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 79.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
According
to the 1999 Decree on the Legal Statute on Scientific Research Institutions,
regular independent evaluations are required. External evaluations made by
independent panels of internationally recognised experts are promoted by the
FCT and are held in accordance with this law.
The
culture of international peer review is firmly established in the university
system in Portugal. The main exception to this rule is the funding that
supports the network of public laboratories, which is not usually linked to
peer-review mechanisms. However, the research teams that work in these
laboratories also submit proposals for funding for their research projects to
the regular 'R&D projects – Projects of Scientific and Technological
Development Research' calls, and with this component they are under the
'principles of international peer review'.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is increasingly allocated based on institutional assessments.
Until
2011, the research institutions were mainly financed through multiannual block
funding and since then it has been increasingly based on performance. 
The
evaluation of research institutions is defined by law and the FCT organises
regular assessments of national R&D institutions. These evaluations occur
approximately every five years, and currently the national R&D institutions
are being evaluated with the support of the European Science Foundation. The evaluation
exercise is based on periodic assessments by an international panel of experts,
based on the R&D institutions' reports and activity plans as well as direct
contacts with researchers and onsite visits by the evaluation panel. After each
assessment, all R&D institutions are awarded a qualitative grade, which
determines the level of funding to be awarded until the next evaluation takes
place, or until a mid-term review.The institutions ranked excellent or good are
invited to participate in the calls for 'strategic projects'.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 8.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Transnational
cooperation has been a key objective of Portugal’s Science and Technology
(S&T) policy over the past 40 years. This is reflected, amongst others, in
the large number of bilateral agreements that Portugal has signed with other EU
countries and with several universities in the United States of America (USA).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Portugal allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Portugal dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
higher than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of Portuguese participation in the total participation is 2 %
and the country received 1.2 % of the total European Commission's contribution.
FP7 funding represents EUR 43 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per
inhabitant) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.6 % of the gross domestic
expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data)
(the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in three of the ten
ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative disease research
(Alzheimer), Water challenges for a changing world and Healthy and productive
seas and oceans. Portugal has observer status in the initiatives Cultural
heritage and global change: A new challenge for Europe and Urban Europe–Global
challenges, local solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so-called
Article 185 initiatives of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Portugal was involved in four programmes co-funded through FP6 and FP7. In
Horizon 2020, these programmes continued into second phases and the country is
already involved in all four of the existing initiatives: AAL2, EDCTP2, EMPIR
and Eurostars2.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. Portugal has participated in a total of 59 ERA-Nets, of which 29 are currently still
running. The country also has participated in five ERA-Net Plus actions – of
which three are still running – in areas with high European added value and
additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Portugal has numerous bilateral and multilateral agreements. An example of a strategic
bilateral initiative under this action is the International Iberian
Nanotechnology Laboratory (INL). This initiative is the result of a joint
collaboration between the Portuguese and Spanish Governments. Although INL has
suffered from the budgetary difficulties faced by both countries, for which a
number of solutions are being implemented to open INL up to wider transnational
collaborations, it is an example of transnational cooperation in science and
research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not yet developed a specific policy, although scientific and
technological cooperation with China, India, North African countries and the
Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries, including Brazil, Angola, Mozambique and Cape Verde, has been a priority. It is also proceeding on cooperating
with universities in the USA on programmes that are specifically targeted for
advanced training and research. The general monitoring of the cooperation
programmes’ implementation is based on quantitative indicators, such as the
number of open calls, the number of funded projects or the amount of associated
funding, but on what regards cooperation programmes with the US universities,
independent evaluations have been conducted, namely by the Academy of Finland,
after the end of their first editions, which has allowed for a revision and
readjustment of the programmes' curricula, objectives and activity profiles.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Portugal allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, there seems to be no research and
development budget originating from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
in bilateral or multilateral programs takes place in many programmes. National
funding institutions apply international peer-review standards. The main
countries with which Portugal has bilateral or multilateral
initiatives/agreements/programmes which allow for mutual recognition of
evaluations, are the following: Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Serbia, Slovenia and Spain.
The
common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of
joint programmes are almost fully applied (with the exception of intellectual
property rights) by funding agencies in the country in several bilateral and
multilateral joint calls. Their implementation is supported through contracts
with the FCT where the objectives, evaluation criteria, budgets, payment terms
and conditions, as well as the respective management rules (including operation
of the Boards of Directors, management and annual external international
review) are defined.
No
information was found as to whether funding agencies implement 'Money follows
cooperation', a scheme which allows small parts of a project funded by one of
the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. No
information was found as to whether funding agencies implement 'Money follows
researchers', a scheme which enables researchers moving to a research
institution in a different country to transfer ongoing grant funding to the new
institution and continue research activities according to the original terms
and objectives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
Research
funders in Portugal who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Portugal
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO and ESRF. In 2012, the country contributed 1 % of
the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular
Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin
(ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 22 of them (44 %). 
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures (RIs), Portugal is committed to funding two of them (ESSurvey,
ECRIN) and has signed Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) of another eight
(ELIXIR, INSTRUCT, EMSO, EPOS, EMBRC, LIFEWATCH, CLARIN, SKA).
With
regard to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Portugal is involved in two of the six consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries. Portugal is a member of ESS ERIC and ECRIN-ERIC.
The
FCT is developing the first National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures,
aligned with the ESFRI Roadmap, taking into account the results of a national
consultation that took place in 2013 with the aim of identifying RIs of
strategic interest. The decision on the infrastructures selected is expected in
the first quarter of 2014. On the basis of this decision, financial commitments
to national, European and international RIs will be defined in the roadmap.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
completion of the design of the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures
is expected to contribute to improved conditions for cross-border access to RIs.
In
addition, there are several information services that facilitate cross-border
access to Portuguese RIs, such as the MERIL database, which includes
information on the European RIs and the specific webpages for each RI.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Portugal in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Portugal_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 50 061 FTE researchers in Portugal in 2011. This represents 9.0
researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union
reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 3.4 in Portugal compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (MORE2 survey, 2012).
In
  Portugal, procedures for recruiting researchers are generally open and
transparent. However, the existing legislative framework sometimes makes the
system less effective than it might be. Portuguese institutions do not always
publish job vacancies online and English is not always used.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
‘Charter & Code’ has not yet been implemented in Portugal. The FCT, the
Rectors’ Council and the Council of Associate Laboratories have established
working groups to analyse the possible implementation of the ‘Charter &
Code’.
By
May 2014, 3 Portuguese organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 1 had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.         
The
current R&D Units and Associate Laboratories Evaluation System was
established in 1996 and there were only small changes up to its current version
of 2007. The system evaluates the researcher working conditions offered by
Portuguese Institutions. The evaluation procedure includes periodic assessments
by international experts, as well as reports and activity plans. The evaluation
exercise results in the award of a qualitative grade, which determines the
volume of funding to be received by the institution up to the next evaluation.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.6 in
2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
The Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) is implementing a major
fellowship programme, including five year contracts for PhD holders and
post-doc, and PhD grants in an effort to increase the number of students taking
science to a doctoral level. Nevertheless, the Government of Portugal has not
adopted any concrete measure to increase the number of female students taking
science to an advanced (doctoral) level as the female percentage is already
high. 
All
PhD programmes promoted by Portuguese Universities are accredited and evaluated
by the National Evaluation and Assessment Agency (A3ES), which guarantees their
quality. The Agency also has a mandate to provide the Portuguese State with expertise in matters of higher education quality assurance, participate in the
European quality assurance system (EQAR), and coordinate assessment and
accreditation activities in Portugal with international institutions.
The
FCT has three evaluation criteria when selecting researchers to be funded: the
merit of the candidate, the merit of the project and the quality conditions of
the host Institution, including career provisions.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 3.2% in Portugal compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 12.0% in Portugal compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2%. 
The
FCT has launched a number of key programmes aimed at attracting and retaining
leading EU and third-country researchers to Portugal. Since 2011, in order for
a non-national researcher to enrol for PhD training, a Portuguese residence
permit has been a prerequisite. For post-doctorate candidates, there is no such
restriction. The FCT has implemented the Marie Curie co-funded programme
WELCOME II – Promoting the return of researchers to the European Research Area.
This Programme promotes the mobility of researchers holding the nationalities
of an EU Member State or an FP7-Associated Country to FP7, who has lived in any
third country for at least the last three years, to join institutions located
in Portugal. Third countries are neither Member-States nor Associated Countries
with FP7.
Individuals
may apply for a doctoral degree grant in a company in Portugal that satisfies
the criteria set out in Article 30 §1 of Decree Law No 74/2006 of 24 March 2006
for the purpose of carrying out doctoral degree work in the business
environment on subjects of interest to that enterprise, as long as this work is
accepted by the university that confers the respective doctoral degree. FCT
funds 50% of the fellowship and the company the remaining 50%. In 2012, some
100 fellowships were funded.
In
order to qualify for this type of grant, a work plan must be submitted
detailing the objectives, the support to be provided for the recipient’s
research activity in the enterprise, and the expected interaction between the
enterprise and the university where the recipient is enrolled in the doctoral
degree programme. The form of articulation between the academic orientation for
the doctoral programme provided by a university professor or researcher and the
corresponding company supervision must be set forth in a protocol signed by
both entities involved. These grants are, in principle, one year in length,
renewable for up to a total of four years, and cannot be awarded for periods of
fewer than three consecutive months. 
The
Government of Portugal has not put in place concrete measures encouraging
researchers to move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa. This
choice remains personal and is made on an individual basis.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Portugal
has no specific gender provisions in the field of public research.
Gender
equality is a fundamental constitutional right, enforced through different
laws. Laws and acts foster gender equality mostly in public employment and
education. The key instruments for promoting gender equality are the National
Plans for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination. The 2014-2017
Plan was launched after a public consultation and aims at promoting gender
equality in line with the European Pact for Equality among Men and Women.
Notably, the new plan introduces the Gender Studies category in the FCT
research financing lines, and a research project aimed at assessing women's
participation in information and communication technologies (ICT) education
courses.
The
Commission for Citizenship and Gender Equality (GIC), the national mechanism
for the promotion of gender equality, provides technical and financial support
to the implementation of gender equality action plans in universities, focusing
on the promotion of gender equality in organisational structures, management
practices – selection/recruitment procedures, career development and rewarding
mechanisms – and on family- work-life reconciliation. Two Portuguese
universities have gender equality action plans. 
The
Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e Emprego (CITE) or Commission for
Equality in Labour and Employment also promotes gender equality.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 36.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within
the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
The
country has measures supporting a return to work after parental leave. The same
position is guaranteed by law after maternity leave. 
It
has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to support
female researchers specifically. Portugal annually hosts the L’Oréal Portugal medals of Honour for Women in Science, intended to promote scientific research at
the post-graduate level in Portuguese universities or other organisations of
recognised merit in the field of health sciences and environmental sciences.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
The
2014-2017 National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and
Non-discrimination has introduced the Gender Studies category in the FCT
research financing lines.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey did not indicate any
support to the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making,  there are no initiatives or regulations
promoting equal gender representation in academic and research committees,
boards and governing bodies. Portugal has not set up gender quotas or any
measures ensuring balanced composition of governing bodies of higher education
institutions.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Portugal is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access (OA), there is a specific policy on open access
to publications since May 2014.
Related
to open access to publications, the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT)
adopted a policy on open access to publicationsin May 2014. According to the
policy, peer-reviewed publications must be made available in one of the
institutional OA repositories of the OA Scientific Repository of Portugal
(RCAAP – Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal; more details
below).
According
to the 2009 report 'Open Access in Portugal – A State of the Art Report', which
was commissioned by the RCAAP, most Portuguese universities have their own
institutional repository and OA developments in Portugal  have been mainly
achieved by institutional repositories and  self-archiving (Green OA), and to a
lesser extent with open access publishing (Gold OA).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 33 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of publicly-funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is higher than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the FCT made a policy statement on open access to data  in
May 2014, however it was more cautious than open access to publications. The
FCT encourages researchers to make research data available in open access if
and when they judge it possible and appropriate. The RCAAP, established in
2008, is the most significant initiative. Currently more than half a million
documents are accessible in OA through RCAAP.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 33 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
open access to data is similar to the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing
organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded
scientific research data systematically is higher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
Regarding
repositories, there are four: 
•           RCAAP
(Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal or Portugal Open Access
Science Repository), a recognised repository of publications and data;
•           The
DeGóis Curricula Platform, an instrument for gathering, supplying and analysing
the intellectual and scientific production of Portuguese researchers;
•           b-on
or the Online Knowledge Library, which provides unlimited access to a large
database of scientific publications for researchers. Portugal decided in 2013
to continue funding b-on. EUR 40.6 million will be paid to the publishers that
supply the contents of the b-on over a three-year period (2013, 2014 and 2015);
•           OpenDoar
Webpage, which stores the collections of 43 Portuguese repositories.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to Open Innovation (OI) and Knowledge Transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, Portugal has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. 
However,
there is a relevant initiative under preparation called GAIN (Global Innovation
Acceleration Network) that aims at providing a national structure for
technology transfer. GAIN results from a partnership between the Ministry of the
Economy and the Ministry of Education and Science. In practical terms GAIN will
be based on the collaboration between the FCT (Science and Technology
Foundation), the ADI (Innovation Agency), the IAPMEI (Institute for Business
Investment) and the four partnerships between Portugal and universities in the USA. Its objectives are the following: creation of spin-offs and commercialisation of
technology and knowledge; creation of an international network of Portuguese
incubators (Portuguese Global Innovation Hub); observation and monitoring of
technology transfer activity.
Two
relevant measures support the implementation of research training agreements
with private sector organisations through the FCT: 
•           PhD
scholarships in industry (Bolsas de Doutoramento em Empresas, BDE): these
provide grants to researchers who wish to develop research work in the business
environment leading to a doctoral degree;
•           Mobility
grants: grants to researchers to perform R&D activities in companies or
other public or private entities, to participate in advanced training
programmes involving business associations and scientific institutions or
universities, or to carry out activities that promote technological innovation,
namely in firms dedicated to risk capital management, technological
intermediation, management of intellectual property and scientific consulting.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 71.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 70.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support
national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Portugal has not set up a
strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and
education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. This
network is FCCN or NREN, the Portuguese National Research and Education
Network, a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the
needs of the research and education communities within the country.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides premium services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Portugal
was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The country is not member
of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of
information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.
However,
  Portugal has signed the policy to join eduGAIN through RCTSaai.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 62 research-performing organisations in Portugal answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 17.2 % of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011) and around one
third of research-performing organisations.
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research-performing
organisations in Portugal shows that 40.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’
cluster, 39.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 20.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results vary significantly. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are as follows: 87.9 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’
cluster; 8.7 % for the ‘ERA-limited compliant’ cluster; and 3.5 % for those
organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.
Seven
regional authorities, which fund research, have not responded to the ERA
survey.
Regarding
the indicator ‘Share of funders supporting gender equality in research' it
should be noted that it is lower than the EU average due to the existence of
overarching laws supporting equality. 
Regarding
the indicator ‘Share of research-performing organisations which have adopted
gender equality plans', it should be noted that gender equality in research
applies in practice, with more than 45 % of researchers being women.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Diagnosis of the national research and innovation system by FCT || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Regulation of access to scientific RTD funding || 2010 ||   ||   
 Incentive Programme || 2012 || X ||   
 R&D projects - Projects of Scientic and Technological Development Research ||   ||   ||   
 SWOT analysis in order to identify areas of R&D competitive advantages || 2013 || X || X 
 Planned reform of the System of Fiscal Incentives to R&I in the Industry || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 R&D Units || 2007 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Creation of the International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory (INL) || 2005 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Design of the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X 
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Programme 'FCT Researcher' || 2013 || X || X 
 Statute of University Teaching Career || 1979 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess in Portugal ||   ||   ||   
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 FCT PhD Programmes || 2012 || X ||   
 New typology and diversity of doctoral programs || 2012 || X ||   
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 L’Oréal Portugal Medals of Honor for Women in Science ||   ||   ||   
 CITE (Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e Emprego) or Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Fifth National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination (2014-2017) || 2014 || X || X 
 Parliament Resolution 46/2013 'No labor discrimination of women' || 2013 || X || X 
 Fourth National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination (2011-2013) || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) || 2008 ||   ||   
 DeGóis Curricula Platform || 2008 ||   ||   
 b-on - Online Knowledge Library  || 2005 ||   ||   
 Open Access (OA) policy to publications, by FCT || 2014 || X || X 
 Policy statement on Open Access and sharing of research data, by FCT || 2014 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Strategy for Intellectual Property in R&D projects ||   ||   ||   
 GAIN - Global Innovation Acceleration Network || 2013 || X || X 
 Programme of Applied Research and Technology Transfer to the Industry || 2012 || X ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of National
Education (MNE), which formulates policies in cooperation with other sectoral
ministries. The MNE also manages the national research and innovation strategy
and coordinates the main implementation instruments, i.e. the National Research
and Innovation Plan and the research and development (R&D) programme.
At
the level of R&D funding and implementation, the Executive Agency for
Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI),
which is under the authority of the MEN, plays a key role in implementing the
research and innovation plan and allocating higher education funding. Other
public funders include the Romanian Academy, which allocates the budget for its
research institutes, and the Ministry of Economy and the Ministry of
Agriculture, which manage sectoral research, development and innovation (RDI)
plans. Public performers include coordinating organisations such as the Romanian Academy, the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Academy of Agriculture and Forestry
Sciences and the Academy of Technical Sciences, national R&D institutes,
public research institutes, and universities.
Romania
has developed the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation
2014-2020, which is currently under Government approval and which is aligned
with the Europe 2020 Strategy, Innovation Union, Horizon 2020 and the European
Research Area (ERA). The National Strategy highlights the need for research to
be better translated research into innovation, R&D efforts to be better
aligned with the Smart Specialisation Strategy and an improved quality of
fundamental research. The National Strategy is implemented through the National
Plan for Research, Development and Innovation (2014-2020) and the Operational
Programme 'Competitiveness' – priority axis ‘Research, technological
development and innovation for supporting business and competitiveness’. In
parallel, Romania has also developed the National Competitiveness Strategy,
which is to be approved during summer 2014. Moreover, Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme highlights the need to ensure Romania’s integration into
the ERA.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Romania represented EUR14 per inhabitant in 2012, which represents less than 10 % of the
EU28 average (EUR179). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant increased to EUR15.
In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 0.6 % of total government
expenditures and 0.2 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic
crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total
GBAORD in Romania has been higher than the growth rate of total EU GBAORD. The
GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Romania than the regression
observed in the EU-28.
In
order to achieve the R&D objectives, the National Strategy for Research,
Development and Innovation 2014-2020 includes annual plan for R&D public
expenditure for the entire period 2014-2020. However, this planning may be
jeopardised by the current fiscal and budgetary measures (Fiscal and Budgetary
Strategy 2014-2016 and the Law of the National Budget 2014, No. 356/2013) which
de facto significantly limit R&D spending. Moreover, EU structural funds
for R&D allocated for the period 2014-2020 will most likely be comparable
to the previous cycle, meaning that the R&D target is dependent on
government resources. Tax credits for businesses (50 % additional tax deduction
on R&D expenditure) to support the commercialisation of research results
were introduced as part of the Government Ordinance 8/2013; however, the
measure is not fully operational, as the implementing acts have yet to be finalised.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Project-based
funding is allocated by the Executive Agency for Higher Education, Scientific
Research, Development and Innovation Funding through the National Plan for
Research, Development and Innovation as well as through the Operational
Programme Competitiveness. As part of the National Plan, project-based funding
is allocated to a variety of R&D projects and schemes with a structure
which is similar to the EU FP7.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 97.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are systematically implemented
within the framework of the National Plan for Research, Development and
Innovation and the Research, Development and Innovation Operational Programme
for EU structural funds. With regard to the National Plan for Research,
Development and Innovation, all proposals need to be drafted in Romanian and
English. Earlier legislation foresaw the use of foreign evaluators for the
evaluation of R&D projects, programmes and institutions (at least 50 %
foreign experts). However, this provision has been scrapped as part of the Government
Ordinance 1241/2013.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is not allocated based on institutional assessment. The issue faced by
the Romanian public research systems is the limited amount of institutional
funding. The need to ensure stable institutional funding and a better link to
institutional funding with institutional assessment has been acknowledged in
the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020.
Institutional funding is provided to the Romanian Academy -which receives a
relatively constant amount that correlates with the number of researchers – and
to national R&D institutes, through the Programme. With regard to
universities, it should be noted that from 1994 onwards, Romanian universities
have not received any institutional funding for their research activities. The
only source of funding for their research activities is through project-based
funding. The issue of a highly fragmented public research sector has been recognised
in Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme and the National Strategy for
Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020, which calls for a restructuring
and streamlining of public research institutes to allow for a concentration of
funding. The reform of universities and public research organisations launched
in 2011 aimed at restructuring the public research sector and introducing
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding. Between
2011 and 2013, 39 of the 46 national R&D institutes were assessed. However,
this exercise has not led in practice to significant changes to the allocation
of institutional funding for research-oriented universities nor to a reduction
or streamlining of public research organisations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Romania who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of
institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 emphasises
the need to better align R&D efforts with societal challenges.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Romania allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Romania dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of Romanian participation in the total participation is 0.9 %
and the country received 0.4 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7
funding represents EUR7 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR72 per capita) for
the period 2007-2013 and 4.4 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average 3 % of
GERD for the same period).
The
National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s participation in Horizon 2020. Moreover, the elaboration of the National Strategy
for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 is aligned with Horizon
2020.
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in six of the
ten ongoing initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Food
Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change:
a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, Antimicrobial
resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Water Challenges for a
Changing world, and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.
The
National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020
specifically foresees funding for JPIs and highlights the need to concentrate
R&D resources on the four areas identified in the Smart Specialisation
Strategy (bio-economy, information and communication technologies, space and
security, energy and climate change and eco-nanotechnologies).
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 96 ERA-Nets, of which 36 are
currently still running. The country also has participated in eight ERA-Net
Plus actions of which four are still running - in areas with high European
added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
The
country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission
in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova,
Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It includes
science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six
scientific clusters had been launched, for example a cluster in energy and
sustainability research.
Romania
participates in the development of ESA and CERN programmes as a full and
candidate Member State, respectively. The National Strategy for Research,
Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s strategy vis-à-vis
existing and new initiatives and foresees related funding.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has set up approximately 17 bilateral research agreements. In
particular, it has agreed on research programmes with Switzerland, Norway,  Iceland and Liechtenstein, which provide for joint research projects and
thematic research calls. The country also has agreements with the United States
of America (USA), South Africa, China, Korea, Russia and Turkey. The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s approach to cooperation with third countries, notably through the funding of
bilateral calls. The country does not monitor the implementation of cooperation
programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Romania allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the organisations did not received
funding originating from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards
is implemented in Romania routinely as part of its joint programmes or
bilateral agreements. This is the case under the Swiss-Romanian cooperation
programme and within the framework of Romania’s international agreements with Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey and Hungary. Moreover, the ERA-like grant scheme provides grants to researchers who have been
successfully evaluated but not retained for funding by the European Research
Council (ERC) competition.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Romania allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is
higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national
and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of eight of them (0,16 %). The
country coordinates none of them.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures (RIs), Romania is committed to funding two of them: Extreme
Light Infrastructure – Nuclear Physics (ELI-NP), and FAIR. Romania has allocated a large budget for the development of the ELI-NP, which is the largest
research infrastructure to be built in Romania. With the ELI-NP infrastructure,
  Romania has been a pioneer in the use of EU structural funds for investing in
a pan-European research infrastructure.
With
regard to the participation in the ERIC, Romania participates in one
(CERIC-ERIC) of the seven consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed
by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research
infrastructures of European interest which involve several European countries.
In
terms of support to Research Infrastructures, Romania’s has been increasingly
involved in the development and implementation of research infrastructures. The
national roadmap for research infrastructures was produced in 2007 by the
Romanian Committee for Research Infrastructures (CRIC). Moreover, the National
Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 announces the development
of a new national roadmap for research infrastructures, which should be in line
with the Smart Specialisation Strategy. The updated roadmap will also include
references to the participation of Romania in the development of the research
infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI Roadmap.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
The
National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 mentions
the setting up of a National Research Infrastructure Registry, aiming at
facilitating access to research infrastructures for public and private users. Romania facilitates researchers’ access to the ESFRI projects in which the country
participates. Support to access is mainly provided through the Sectoral
Operational Programme 'Increase of Economic Competitiveness (SOP-IEC) priority
axis 2: Operation 2.2.1 - Development of the existing R&D infrastructure
and creation of new infrastructures, laboratories and research centres.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Romania  in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Romania_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 16 080 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Romania in 2011. This represents 1.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 3.0
among the Innovation Union reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 24.7 in Romania compared with 9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7.
In
2012, 51% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
recruitment system is regulated by the Government Decision on general
principles for recruitment in the public sector (HG No.286/2011), the Law on
the Statute of R&D personnel (Law no. 319/2003) and the National Education
Law (Law No.1/2011). National legislation does not impose online advertising of
public research positions. It is mandatory that research vacancies are
published in the Romanian Official Journal, newspapers and at the universities’
headquarters. Higher education institutions (HEIs) and R&D institutions
have their own internal procedures on recruitment which are in accordance with
these laws and are generally published on the institutions’ website.
A
set of policies has been developed to make the system more open and
transparent, such as the Scientific Visa and other admission conditions for
foreign researchers.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
Romania
actively promotes the implementation of the principles of the ‘Charter &
Code’ through the information package for the recruitment of researcher (PN
II). In the publicly financed R&D recruitment procedures, the ‘Charter
& Code’ are not specifically mentioned. However, the main principles of this
document are reflected in the main policy documents on recruitment. 
By
May 2014, four Romanian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers of which two had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.
Education
Law No. 1/5 January 2011 changed the old system of public university funding
based on the number of students to a system based on an internal assessment and
performance classification of all departments carried out every five years.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.7 in
2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
Romanian Law on Education (2010) has brought some changes that are designed to
enhance the quality of doctoral training, such as: increases in
performance-based funding for doctoral studies; dual statute of students as
both doctoral students and research assistants or university assistant for a
pre-determined period; the mobility of research grants; more flexibility in the
internal organisation of the doctorate schools and enhanced autonomy for the
university; a requirement that doctoral programmes be organised only on a
full-time basis; a national code of doctoral studies of which the objective is
to promote and implement procedures for enhancing the quality of the
organisation and content of doctoral programmes, rights and obligations of
doctoral students, doctorate coordinators and others.
Massive
support for doctoral and post-doctoral schools was provided by the Sectoral
Operational Programme 'Development of Human Resources', which targeted 12000
Doctors of Philosophy (PhDs) and 2000 post-doctorals in order to contribute
towards the development of potential human resources for RDI. Unfortunately,
for the moment, the access of these graduates to the R&D system is quite
low, given the scarcity of projects and the restrictions on employment in the
public sector. The total budget for this support was EUR325 million. In 2011,
there were 88 projects which supported 9734 PhDs at a total cost of
approximately EUR24133 per PhD. 
Given
the drastic reduction in funding for most research programmes, it can be
estimated that recent infrastructures are underused, while the prospects of the
new PhD graduates embarking on a research career are unclear. The long-term
underfinancing has already been a determinant of a substantial brain drain, as Romania has one of the largest scientific amongst the European countries, with an estimated
15000 researchers.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 1.6 % in Romania compared with 1.7 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.1 % in Romania compared with 2.0 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2 %. 
In
 Romania, the balance between inward and outward flows of researchers is
severely tilted towards the outward flows, as Romania is one of the EU
countries with the highest losses of qualified R&D personnel. This
situation is caused by several factors, including the low market demand for
researchers, low salaries in the science and technology (S&T)/RDI system,
low political importance attached to the role of science, research and innovation
for economic growth, in spite of the government rhetoric,
insufficient/inadequate research infrastructure, insufficient funding of
programmes meant to increase the attractiveness of S&T/R&D careers and,
more recently, significant additional cuts brought about by the economic
crisis, etc. The mobility of scientists and the attractiveness and
consolidation of scientific careers is supported by several funding schemes
under the Human Resources Programme of the 2007-2013 National RDI Plan, but
most of them were discontinued after the sharp budget cuts of 2009 and have so
far not been reactivated. 
The
Human Resources Programme of the 2007-2013 National RDI Plan has a few mobility
schemes that allow PhD students to conduct innovation projects in firms, such
as projects supporting the mobility of PhD candidates (which provides funding
for three months in a public or private research lab) and post-doctoral
research projects for the development of an independent career for young
Romanian PhD researchers, especially by granting them access to top research
infrastructure. In 2012, SOP-IEC priority axis 1 launched the first call for
support to the development of 'poles of competitiveness' in Romania. The poles of competitiveness are described as an association, in a defined geographic
area, among undertakings, research centres and educational institutions engaged
in collaborative partnership (according to a joint development strategy) in
order to generate synergies around a set of innovative projects aimed at one or
more markets. Also, SOP-IEC priority axis 2 'Promoting innovation in
enterprises' supports the secondment of highly qualified personnel from
research organisations to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) for a maximum
period of of three years.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Regarding
general legislation on gender equality, Romania provides for one of the longest
periods of childcare leave in Europe (Law 111/2010 amended by Governmental
Ordinance 124/2011). However, there are no measures that address gender
equality in research besides a government ordinance (Government Ordinance
111/2010), which supports career breaks for PhD candidates. This may be
explained by the fact that women are well represented in the research sector.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any support
to gender equality in public research.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
Several
scholarships have been granted to support female careers under the National
Fellowship Programme 'UNESCO L’Oréal for Women in Science'. This programme is
implemented in partnership with the National Commission for UNESCO, L’Oréal Romania, the Romanian  Academy and the National Authority for Scientific Research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no measures
reported.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any support
to the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, there are no measures reported.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 24.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 70 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Romania is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme and
the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020
support the gold open access standard access for publishing the results of
publicly funded research. Moreover, the development of open access has been
spearheaded by the stakeholder-driven initiative Kosson as part of OpenAIRE
(see below). There is, however, no overall legislative or policy provision
supporting open access to publications and data.
Related
to open access to publications, a notable initiative at stakeholder level is
the Kosson initiative promoted by the Transylvania University, Brașov and
the Romanian Library Association. Kosson is a member of OpenAIRE and it
supports the development of open access to scientific publications. Kosson has
been active in launching a debate around good practices, methods, standards and
policies for open access. The majority of publications is published through
peer-reviewed scientific journals and afterwards may be published on open
access communities such as http://www.acces-deschis.ro/en/ and
http://www.kosson.ro
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any
support to open access to publications. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research
performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the Kosson initiative also supports the development of
open access to scientific data.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 37.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded
scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
With
respect to repositories, there is currently no overall legislative or policy
measure. However, the Kosson initiative on open access supports the development
of standards for the management and storage of data.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors, knowledge transfer has been acknowledged as a strategic policy
objective in the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation
2014-2020 and Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme. 
The
National Strategy includes tax credits to foster public-private partnerships
and ‘competence centres’ (i.e. public-private platforms). Several other
measures have provided support to public-private cooperation. Knowledge
transfer has been supported by ReNITT, which is a network for innovation and
technological transfer and is made up of 12 technology transfer centres, 12
centres for technological information and 15 technological and business
incubators. Four scientific and technological parks complement ReNITT. Although
the activities of these entities remain relatively modest, efforts are deployed
to enhance their institutional capacity (see below). The support measure to
innovative start-ups and spin-offs, launched in 2008 with a total budget of
EUR18.5 million, has provided funding for the creation of spin-offs that
implement the recent results resulting from research projects and doctoral
theses of researchers employed in public R&D institutes and academics from public
universities. Moreover, various schemes (e.g. the National RDI Plan
(2007-2013), SOP IEC and the information package and de minimis aid scheme for
innovation vouchers) have financed partnerships between academia/research
institutes and the private sector. Romania has not developed a knowledge
transfer strategy.
Regarding
support to technology transfer offices (TTOs), the National Strategy for
Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 includes measures supporting the
development of knowledge transfer skills and professionals (i.e. knowledge
transfer training, intellectual property rights exchange platforms and
secondment of personnel). The professionalisation and strengthening of the
institutional capacity have also been supported by the 'Development of NASR’s
public policy-making capacity in the field of innovation and technology
transfer to ensure a sustainable socio-economic development’ project
(2011-2013) which was co-funded by the European Social Fund through SOP
‘Development of the Administrative Capacity’, priority axis 1. With a total
budget of approximately EUR3 million, this project aimed at creating a national
network of innovation managers in the national and local administration. 
The
draft Strategy 2014-2020 and its related implementation instruments include
measures supporting the development of incubators and transfer centres at
regional level, as well as the temporary detachment of R&D personnel
between the public and private sector.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 39.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 30.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support KT
and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
As
regards with the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a
research and education network, which is essential to make digital services
possible. RoEduNet is the Romanian National Research and Education Network
(NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the
needs of the research and education communities within the country. Moreover,
an institutional data repository named ASPECKT for doctoral, postgraduate and
undergraduate works was set up by the Transylvania University of Brasov. It is
foreseen that this repository will be used for storing all the research
activity carried out at the Transylvania University of Brasov.
Concerning
digital services, the 2013 National Strategy for Romania’s Digital Agenda includes
measures supporting the development of digital services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Romania
was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is not member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) partners' federations. The National Strategy for Research,
Development and Innovation 2014-2020 supports the adoption of measures on
e-identity to facilitate researchers’ access to digital research services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 47 research performing organisations in Romania answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 27.3% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011). 
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Romania shows that 35.6 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 37.8 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 26.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 43.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 14.5 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 41.8 % for those organisations where
ERA principles are not applicable.
However,
the results for funding organisations should be interpreted with caution since
two relatively important organisations did not respond to the survey. 
It
should also be noted that several RPOs answered ‘not applicable’ to a majority
of questions, whilst their mandate allows them to implement ERA and their
profile is very similar to organisations in the ‘ERA compliant’ and ‘ERA
limited compliance’ clusters (i.e. these are relatively large universities and
research centres). As a result of this self-reporting issue, these organisations
have been clustered in the group ‘ERA not applicable’. However, this does not
fully reflect their 'normal' behaviour.  This is particularly visible in the
section on knowledge transfer (see below).
For
the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations which have adopted
Gender Equality Plans’, the relatively low share at national level is explained
by the fact that gender distribution in science is relatively even between
women and men. 
For
the indicators ‘Share of research performing organisations having or using a
structure for knowledge transfer activities’ and ‘Share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer
activities’, it can be noted that organisations in the ‘ERA not applicable
cluster’ have a relatively high level of implementation. This is due to a
self-reporting issue (i.e. organisations answering ‘not applicable’ in a
majority of questions in the survey).
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Fiscal and Budgetary Strategy 2014-2016 || 2013 || X || X 
 Law of the National Budget 2014, no. 356/2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Government Ordinance 8/2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 National Plan for Research Development and Innovation (2007-2013) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Government Decision no. 133/2011 || 2007 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Education Law no. 1/5 January 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Governmental Decision no. 789/2011, Methodology for classification of universities and ranking of programme studies, according to the provision of the Law on National Education no. 1/ 5 January 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Governmental Decision no. 1062 /19 October 2011 regarding the methodology for the evaluation in view of classification of the units and organisations of the national R&D system || 2011 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Joint programmes and bilateral agreements ||   ||   ||   
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 ERA-like projects ||   ||   ||   
 Joint programmes and bilateral agreements ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures || 2007 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess Romania ||   ||   ||   
 Education Law no. 1/ 5 January 2011 || 2011 ||   ||   
 Sectoral Operational Programme "Development of Human Resources", Doctoral and post-doctoral schools || 2009 ||   ||   
 Measures supporting doctoral and post-doctoral schools of excellence ||   ||   ||   
 Governmental Decision 681/2011 regarding the Code for university doctoral studies || 2011 ||   ||   
 Government Ordinance 92/ 18.12.2012 regarding some measures in higher education and research || 2012 || X ||   
 Provision of the Law of National Education (Law 1/2011) regarding the post-doctoral research studies || 2011 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Law 111/2010 amended by Governmental Ordinance 124/2011 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Governmental Ordinance 111/2010 regarding the leave and monthly financial support for child raising || 2011 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Governmental Ordinance 8/23.01.2013 regarding the changes in the fiscal code || 2013 || X || X 
 ReNITT - network for innovation and technological transfer ||   ||   ||   
 Development of NASR’s public policymaking capacity in the field of innovation and technology transfer to ensure a sustainable socio-economic development’ project || 2011 ||   ||   
 Support to innovative start-ups and spin-offs project - total budget of €18.5m || 2008 ||   ||   
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
 Funding for research universities/institutes – enterprises partnerships through the National RDI Plan 2007-2013 & SOP Increase of Economic Competitiveness ||   ||   ||   
 ANCS Decision no. 9039/01 March 2012 and no. 9038/01 March 2012 (information package and minimis aid scheme for innovation vouchers) ||   ||   ||   
 National RDI Plan (2007-2013) and the SOP Increase of Economic Competitiveness: support to public-private partnerships ||   ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 National Strategy for Romania’s Digital Agenda || 2013 || X || X 
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X 
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the overall responsibility of the Ministry of Education
and Research and the Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communication. National
government agencies carry out and monitor many of the policies.  
The
main governmental agencies supporting research and development (R&D) is the
Swedish Research Council (VR), the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working
Life and Welfare (Forte), and the Swedish Research Council for Environment,
Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas). Among the other
governmental research funding agencies can be noted the Swedish Energy Agency,
various defence agencies, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency (SIDA). Innovation and research of an applied nature is supported by the
Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA).
The
main performers of basic research, but also of applied and strategic research
are the 15 universities, which receive over 90% of the governmental
appropriations for R&D by direct funding and funding from research
councils. The several regional university colleges and the very small (albeit
growing) R&D institute sector complement the universities but account for a
very small share of the public R&D appropriations (Hallonsten and Holmberg
2013).  
The
public research funding system in Sweden is guided by quadrennial Research and
Innovation Bills and the latest Research and Innovation Bill (2012/13:30)
contains priorities for the period 2013 – 2016.
The
2012 National Innovation Strategy issued by the Ministry of Enterprise, Energy
and Communication shares the analysis of the 2008 and 2012 Research and
Innovation bills that Sweden needs to strengthen and improve the quality of the
national R&D in order to keep a competitive position in the globalised
knowledge economy. The innovation strategy is, however, mainly a framework
vision statement and hence does not launch any concrete policies.
The
2012 Research and Innovation Bill stresses the necessity to link regional
growth initiatives with national research and innovation policy. In May 2013
the government assigned the task of developing regional development programmes
for 2014-2020 to regional and national authorities, including research and
innovation strategies.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Sweden represented EUR 378 per inhabitant
in 2012, more than twice the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, the total GBAORD
corresponded to 1.7% of total government expenditures and 0.9% of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
Additional
funds are available from 2014, which are equivalent equivalent to an increase
in appropriations of 3% (National Reform Programme - NRP 2014).
The
analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic
crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total
GBAORD in Sweden has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD.
The GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Sweden even when it regressed at the EU28 level.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
The
share of competitive funding for public R&D in Sweden has increased
significantly and overtaken, not in real terms but relatively, a large share of
university research that was previously funded by institutional block grants
issued directly to the universities. The variations in the ratio between
competitive and institutional funds are due to the various funding increases
launched in the two recent research and innovation bills (2008 and 2012). In
particular, the rather substantial increase in the share of institutional
grants between the years 2009 and 2010 is due to the effectuation of the major
increase of the institutional block grants issued in the 2008 research bill.
The large increase of institutional grants has been matched by a similar
increase of private funding which has kept the share of competitive funding
larger than the institutional.
A
corresponding increase in the project-based funding (also resulting from the
2008 research bill) of almost 20 % between 2008 and 2009 makes the long-term
development of the ratio between institutional block grants and competitive
funding largely unchanged in the past five year period (with a slight relative
overall increase of the share of competitive funding from 50.9 % in 2007 to
52.5 % in 2011).
According
to the Swedish NRP 2014, in 2013, 33% of central government funds was
distributed through project-based funding.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 81.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
peer review based assessment is the general rule within the Swedish Research
Councils and VINNOVA, and the typical procedure is to have applications within
general calls assessed by the scientific assessment boards that are either
elected from the academic sector (research councils) or appointed by the
director-general (VINNOVA).
However,
the allocation of competitive public R&D funding in Sweden (mainly executed
within the framework of the research councils) typically follows the procedure
of internal peer review assessment boards with predominantly Swedish or
Scandinavian members, with the exception of the ‘excellence’ funding
programmes, i.e. the 2006 and 2008 Linnaeus Grants and the 2009 Strategic Research
Areas grants (allocating in total EUR 30 million and EUR 300 million,
respectively). These funding programs involved the use of international peer
reviewers in the process of choosing grant recipients.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
The
Research and Innovation Bill 2012 strengthened the institutional funding
allocation on the basis of performance evaluation. In two steps, via the 2008
and 2012 Research Bills, parts of the institutional funding allocation to
higher education institutions (HEIs) have been made competitive
(performance-based); the 2008 bill earmarked 10% of all HEIs research block
grant funding to a (primarily bibliometric-orientated) performance-based
allocation scheme, and the 2012 bill increased the amount to 20% as of 2014.
According
to the Swedish NRP 2014, in 2013, institutional funding represented 50% of the
central government funds.
The
Research and Innovation Bill 2012 defines that the distribution of funding
between HEIs as being determined by quality, measured by two criteria:
publications/references to publications and external research funds. 
The
2012 Research and Innovation Bill described a move from bibliometric assessment
to international peer review evaluation as the basis for reallocation of
institutional funding. The Swedish Research Council has been charged with
designing the system in all its specifics so that it can be implemented in
2018, at the earliest.
Sweden
has developed a quality assurance system for evaluating research at universities
that is aimed to result in an increasing quality of research. At the same time,
however, traditional indicators are used, which might limit the growth of new
research and the interaction with society (Joint Research Centre, JRC 2013).
In
2013 VINNOVA was tasked, in consultation with other central government research
financiers, with designing methods and criteria for assessing the quality of
higher education institutions’ cooperation with the surrounding community (NRP
2014).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 15.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
Swedish
governmental R&I policy is strongly based on the analysis that the
competitiveness of the Swedish national economy and society hinges upon a
strengthening of the Swedish national research and innovation system. Swedish
research policy measures are designed by partly taking into account the policies
of other European countries. The 24 Strategic Research Areas, identified in the
2008 Research bill and endowed with a specific funding programme allocating a
total of EUR 300 million to 43 research environments in Swedish universities
have been identified as also being highly relevant in the broader European
perspective. Furthermore, VINNOVA began in 2011 launching calls aimed at
solutions to grand challenges. The role of the Swedish research and innovation
system in strengthening the long-term common European competitiveness is
further strengthened in the latest Research and Innovation bill with a new
coordination function for European partnership programmes. This function
involves all Swedish research funding agencies. An additional SEK 200 million
funding per year has been allocated to this function to meet the increased
number of European partnership programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Sweden allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Sweden dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher
than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework
Programme, the share of Swedish participation in the total participation is
3.9% and the country received 4.3% of the total European Commission
contribution. FP funding represents EUR 164 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72
per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.7% of the Gross Domestic
Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data)
(EU average 3% of GERD for the same period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all ten of the
on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them - Antimicrobial resistance - an
emerging threat to human health.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in the four existing initiatives.
ERA-NETs
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 81 ERA-NETs, of which 19 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in nine ERA-NET Plus
actions - of which 7 are still running - in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
Sweden
is actively cooperating with other Nordic countries in joint programmes and
institutions within the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordic cooperation
involves Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as well as the three
autonomous areas, the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands. The organisation of Nordic collaboration in research and innovation rests on two main
pillars, one for research, NordForsk, and one for innovation, Nordic Innovation
(formerly The Nordic Innovation Centre, NICE). In 2008 the Nordic Prime
Ministers initiated the Top-level Research Initiative (TRI) and it is to date
the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative that has a research
focus within climate, environment and energy.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
Swedish government adopted a Strategy for international cooperation in research
and research based innovation in 2012 and it has framework agreements in the
field of research with eight countries. International cooperation is however
primarily implemented by the national agencies, the public research foundations
and the universities themselves which have their own bilateral and multilateral
agreements. Consequently, there are hundreds of cooperation agreements (JRC
2013).
The
Swedish Research Council has several mobility grants, e.g. International
postdoc, and the International Career Grant. In the last Research Bill a new
grant was introduced, Grants for Recruitment of Leading Researchers. The
Swedish Research Council for Health, Working life and Welfare (Forte) offers
Forte Fellowships and Visiting Researchers. Further, the Swedish Foundation for
Strategic Research (SSF) has a number of specific mobility grants aimed for
mobility to both European and non-European countries. Mobility grants for
exchange with Japan exist in a number of different forms and programmes
organised by the SSF and VINNOVA. Examples of existing programmes include the
Sweden-Korea Research Cooperation funded by the Swedish Foundation for
International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Sweden allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of organisations' research and
development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the
EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Swedish
Research Council (VR) participates in the European Science Foundation (ESF) peer
review forum and ensures that all public bodies responsible for allocating
research funds apply the core principles of international peer review (ESF Peer
Review Guide). Sweden also participates in the ESF through 13 member
organisations that are all public research funding bodies or academic societies
and which represents 31% of the total number of research funding institutions.
The Swedish Research Council cooperates with various international programmes,
e.g 10 Nordforsk programmes, allowing for mutual recognition of evaluations
(Nordforsk 2013).
The
2012 Research Bill highlights the need for the international dimension of
research policy to be strengthened.  With a trend towards encouraging
international collaborations, opening funding programmes to external
collaborators and funding international actors may become a viable option.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 89.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 8.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Sweden allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher
than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Sweden
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
European Space Agency (ESA), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA),
European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory
(ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), European x-ray free
electron laser (European XFEL) and Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). The country
contributes 1 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen
pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the EMBL, the ESO, the ESRF, the ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 29 of them (59%) and
coordinates 2 of them:  EISCAT_3D and ESSneutrons.
In
terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research
Infrastructures, Sweden is committed to fund 16 of them, namely: CESSDA,
ESSurvey, EISCAT_3D,  IAGOS, ICOS, LIFEWATCH, BBMRI, ELIXIR, EMBRC,ESRF
UPGRADE, ESSneutrons, XFEL, ILL 20/20, FAIR and PRACE (ex HPC). So far, Sweden has dedicated SEK 2988 M (EUR 326.7 M) to the conception and/or construction phases
of research infrastructures included in the ESFRI roadmap.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Sweden is involved in two of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed
by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research
infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries,
namely ESS SURVEY ERIC and BBMRI ERIC.
The
Swedish national policy for research infrastructures and the commitments for
the construction and operation of ESFRI infrastructures has resulted in
significant investments in research infrastructures in general.  
In
2007, the Swedish government publicly announced its candidature to host the
European Spallation Source (ESS) and build it in Lund, Sweden. Simultaneously, a grassroots movement had promoted the next-generation synchrotron radiation
facility MAX IV in Lund. The ESS plans for commencing construction are moving
on with binding funding pledges from several countries. Those by Sweden, Denmark and Norway, cover 50% of the construction costs. MAX IV is currently being
constructed in Lund and set for opening in 2016. On 16 December 2013, the
Swedish Research Council decided to allocate a total of just over EUR 150
million for the operation of the MAX IV facility for the years 2013-2018. 
The
national roadmap for research infrastructures was published in December 2011
and includes specific references to the participation of Sweden in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Among
the research infrastructures coordinated by Sweden, the European Commission has
funded access to ten of them.
Regarding
cross-border access to research infrastructures, assessing access to large
research infrastructures in Sweden is dependent on the decisions to be made
with regard to the organisation and legal status of MAX IV, the ESS and the
SciLifeLab. In the case of the ESS, effective access will be granted based on peer-review
evaluation with scientific excellence and feasibility as main criteria
according to policies to be decided by the future ESS organisation. The legal
framework of ESS is planned to be a European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC).
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Sweden in the Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Sweden
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
Stock
of researchers 
There
were 48,589 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Sweden in 2011. This represents 9.7 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4
among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation leaders) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 160.4 in Sweden compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
43.7
In
2012, 64 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Since
1994, the Employment Ordinance requires HEIs to announce all job vacancies
(both permanent or for a fixed period) for academic staff - including teachers
and researchers - and to advertise all relevant information e.g. on the
EURAXESS portal. To ensure that the information on the EURAXESS Sweden portal
is adequate, VINNOVA has been appointed to administer the portal in cooperation
with the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Research Council Formas and the
Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Association of Swedish Higher Education (SUHF), representing the Swedish
Rector’s conference and thereby Swedish universities, signed the ‘Charter &
Code’ in 2007.
By
May 2014, four Swedish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers and none of which had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.
Higher
education institutions and national funders are responsible for taking measures
on researchers’ career development. Some institutions offer the possibility of
a tenure track.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.9 in
2011 compared with 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
2013, 61% of the doctoral students had employment contracts giving the same
social benefits as other employees at the higher education institution
concerned. Some universities already provide employment for all doctoral
students and state funding may not be used for stipends. A research student
doctoral grant is supposed to be converted to an employment relationship for a
doctoral student in the last three years before their dissertation. Since 2001,
the Swedish Higher Education Authority has been responsible for the quality of
the higher education system. Its duties include evaluations of the study
programmes and their subject areas. Some Swedish universities offer research
communication skills, intellectual property rights (IPR)-awareness, career
management and entrepreneurship training in their effort to improve
researchers’ employment skills and competencies.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 10.9% in Sweden compared with 9.1% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 21.9% in Sweden compared with 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of
24.2%. 
Since
2006, European Economic Area (EEA) citizens have not needed a work permit to
reside in Sweden. The Swedish government transposed the Scientific Visa
Directive in 2008. HEIs may decide to allocate funding or other resources to
retain or recruit outstanding researchers. The largest government research
funding agency, the Swedish Research Council (SRC) funds a return phase for
researchers who have spent 50% of their study time abroad. The Swedish Foundation
for Strategic Research (SSF) has a number of specific mobility grants targeting
both European and non-European countries. The Swedish Research Council also
funds outgoing post-doctorates in all scientific areas. 
The
Swedish government has not put in place measures to encourage researchers to
move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa. The researcher flow
in Sweden is almost in one direction, namely towards industry. However, the
Swedish Higher Education Ordinance provides for a position of ‘adjunct
professor’ of up to six years part-time (20-50%). The adjunct professor should
be an expert from the industry to be given the opportunity to work within a
university for a certain period of time. 
The
VINN Excellence Centres (2004-15) are developed by the Swedish Competence
Centres Programme (Centres of Excellence in Research and Innovation) and aim to
strengthen the crucial link between academic research groups and industrial
R&D in the Swedish National Innovation System.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
In
spite of the general strong showing of Swedish in the international rankings
and evaluations of gender equality and equal opportunities policy, recent
general policy initiatives at national level have had little involvement with
policies aimed at providing equal opportunities in academia. The 2012 Research
Bill mentions gender inequality once, and instructs the universities and higher
education institutions to work harder to break the gender bias in education. It
also announced a budget of 32 million SEK per year, to be allocated to VINNOVA,
for practical equality research during 2013-2014. 
In
2013, the Swedish Research Council was tasked to develop a plan for how the
council should contribute to gender equality. The plan is expected to be
implemented in 2014 (NRP 2014).
To
encourage a rise in the proportion of women among professors the Government has
set targets for the recruitment of women professors at 34 HEIs for the period
2012–2015. These targets are based on the calculated recruitment base (senior
lecturers and post-doctoral research fellows) in different fields of research.
There have been targets of this kind since 1997, although none were set for
2009–2011.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 79.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 95.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within
the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Regarding
recruitment, retention and career progression of female researchers, it can be
noted that there are hardly any legislative barriers to gender equality in the
public Swedish R&D system. The Swedish government largely leaves it up to
the institutions themselves to achieve a gender balance in the academic sector.
The
VINNOVA Vinnmer programme was intended for the underrepresented gender in the
scientific field of application and for those researchers who have a PhD and
who have completed their Post Doc qualification. The programme ended in 2014
and is now replaced by the more general Mobility for Growth programme.
General
Swedish law guarantees that employers have to restore employees to the same
positions after maternity or paternity leave. It is usually possible to extend
a fixed-term contract due to maternity or paternity leave. 
The
Swedish Research Council assumes that research conducted with funding from the
Swedish Research Council adheres to good research practice. In the evaluation
of the applications and prior to decisions about grants, the following general
guidelines are applicable to ensure gender equality. The Swedish Research
Council’s gender equality strategy prescribes the same success rate for grants
and the same average size of the grants to apply to women and men with regard
to the nature of the research and the form of grant. Prior to an evaluation
panel determining its proposal for the allocation of the grants, the success
rate for the grants in the proposal shall be calculated for women and for men.
Gender equality should be used as a special condition for the prioritisation of
applications equivalent in terms of quality (or close to equivalent). In these
cases, applications from the underrepresented gender are to be given higher
priority.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Sweden
has set up provision to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes
and/or projects. The country has a dedicated budget for programmes funding
women/gender studies. 
VINNOVA
aims to promote gender equality in appraisal of funding and within the
organisation, and gender mainstreaming within research.
Statskontoret
has been given the task to map and analyse the distribution of funds for
research and doctoreal training from a gender perspective. The mission includes
a study of the distribution process, among other the assesments upon which the
distribution is made. the report is due on 31 Decemner 2014.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 34.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision making, the Researchers Report 2013 mentions that in
Sweden, quotas/national targets are not mandatory. However, there is an
expectation that the number of members on boards, committees, panels etc. be as
gender-balanced as possible.
In
relation to the goal of having at least 40 % of the under- represented sex in
committees, the Government gave a general instruction (Regulation) to the
Swedish Research Council to establish and sustain equal gender representation
on discipline-councils and peer review assessment boards and committees
involved in the recruitment of academic staff. The panels assessing grant
applications at the Swedish Research Council are expected to have a balanced
composition with respect to gender; the Government's instruction to the Council
is that the Council shall 'promote gender equality within its area of work'.
The Council has, on the basis of this instruction, adopted its own gender
equality strategy.
The
share of the under-representing sex participate in committees involved in
recruitment/career progression and in establishing and evaluating research
programmes in Sweden is 49%  (She Figures 2012).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 73.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Sweden is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research
In
terms of governmental policy, the 2012 Research and Innovation bill took one
step towards institutionalising the open access principle in the Swedish public
R&D system, by giving the Swedish Research Council and the National Library
of Sweden the task of developing a national policy for open access to
scientific information - research data and publications. This work is currently
carried out in cooperation with research funding bodies, universities and
higher education institutions. The work is not yet concluded and there has been
no date specified for the delivery of these results. 
Generally,
the Swedish public R&D system is largely orientated to the international
system of results circulation in peer review-based English-speaking journals
owned and run by multinational publishing houses. Although there is a clear
growth in the number of online, open access, journals among the ones preferred
by the scientific community, open access publishing still, in most cases,
requires the author to pay a fee for the review and publication in order to
make the article freely available. Swedish universities spend large and growing
sums of money on institutional subscriptions to the non-open journals, and this
is considered a potential structural problem since the subscription costs only
seem to increase for every year. The government has, consequently, adopted a
strongly articulated policy that favours open access publishing and
comprehensive efforts in the system to facilitate a relatively large increase
in open access publishing in the Swedish universities.
Since
2010, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Research Council for
Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas), the Swedish
Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (Forte), the Bank of
Sweden Tercentenary Foundation (RJ), the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
(KAW) has demanded that their grantees publish their results with open access.
Almost all Swedish universities and higher education institutions have open, searchable
databases where publications are listed and in many cases online versions of
publications are openly accessible.
Related
to open access to publications, two national initiatives to facilitate better
access to scientific publications by indexing publications nationwide and
promoting open access publishing are worthwhile mentioning. None of them are
the result of direct governmental policymaking but they are more of a
collaborative effort between public and private national organisations
(agencies and foundations). First, the SwePub database, run by the National
Library of Sweden makes it possible to search among articles, conference papers
and doctoral dissertations published by researchers at Swedish universities and
higher education institutions (all institutions except the Stockholm School of
Economics are part of SwePub). The Swedish government gave an instruction to
the National Library of Sweden to further develop the SwePub database in order
to use for quality assured bibliometric analyses.
Second,
the OpenAccess.se project is run and funded by the National Library of Sweden
in collaboration with the Association of Swedish Higher Education (an voluntary
interest organisation for Swedish universities and higher education
institutions), The Swedish Research Council, The Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences, the Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences and the
Knowledge Foundation (a public research foundation). Within this project, the
collaborators work with information and counselling, infrastructure and
services, and policy development regarding open access publishing.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 22.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
Open Access to data is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded
scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
The
initiatives on EU level to build up research infrastructures for the
facilitating of dissemination of data and results (e.g. European Social Survey,
CESSDA, SHARE) are supported by the Swedish government who take active part as
members in these initiatives.
The
Swedish Research Council has evaluated Swedish researchers’ need for
e-infrastructures, such as large-scale computing resources for calculation and
storage. The evaluation will be followed-up in 2014 (NRP 2014).
In
Sweden there is an indication for 56 OpenAire data repositories and 44 in
OpenDoar data repositories. Both the proportion of gold and green open access
will be reported as well as the overall percentage of open access publications,
both nationally as well as university (OpenAire).
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, Sweden has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.
However, in 2012 the Government adopted an Innovation Strategy aimed at
strengthening the innovative climate. The Innovation Strategy takes a holistic
view with the purpose of enhancing innovative capacity and meeting social challenges.
The strategy emphasises, for example, the importance of all relevant actors
being involved, the lowering of thresholds and the creation of incentives to
advance different actors' capacity for growth and innovation. The innovation
strategy includes several different areas of policy and affects a number of
government bills over the period up until 2020. 
The
2012 research and innovation bill also presented several measures of importance
for increased commercialisation and utilisation of research results, including
funding and relevant instructions to governmental agencies. The research policy
target was broadened so that research can contribute to the development of
society and industry's competitiveness, resulting in an overarching focus on
utilisation. The measures include for example a new instrument focussing on
societal challenges and further strengthening of industrial research
institutes, as well as new innovation offices at universities. It also includes
measures and initiatives to strengthen the universities and colleges'
assignment to work together with society and benefit from the research results,
with the aim of bringing the lessons learned from this into the future
performance based resource allocation system for 2018, which the Science Council
is tasked to propose.
Funding
organisations have specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of
knowledge transfer. In 2013 VINNOVA was tasked, in consultation with other
research funders, with designing methods and criteria for assessing the quality
of HEIs’ cooperation with the surrounding community. From 2015 on funds will be
allocated to HEIs on the basis of cooperation indicators and an expert
assessment of quality in cooperation. (NRP2014)
A
related task, assigned in 2013, is that VINNOVA, in consultation with the
Swedish Research Council, is to support the HEIs’ development of strategies for
cooperation with the external community, and to work to ensure that
research-based knowledge is utilised (NRP2014).
Also,
innovation offices within all universities in Sweden have a special assignment
to work with knowledge transfer at universities and very early stage
commercialisation.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 55.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 15 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support
national support to KT and OI, technology transfer offices (TTOs) and Private
Public interaction  is lower than the EU average, which may be due to the
higher share of basic research funded nationally.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than
within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
Sweden
has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make
digital services possible - SUNET. SUNET's aim is to provide Swedish
universities and colleges and other organisations within the research and
higher education area with access to well-developed and effective national and
international data communication and related services that meet their needs,
whatever their geographical location. NUNOC (Nordic University Operations
Centre) is the 24/7 operations organisation established by NORDUnet to operate
and support SUNET's network and services.
Sweden
is part of NORDUnet (www.nordu.net) which is a joint collaboration by the five
Nordic National Research and Education Net-works in Denmark (Forskningsnettet),
Finland (Funet), Iceland (RHnet), Norway (Uninett) and Sweden (SUNET) and
operates a world-class Nordic and International network and e-infrastructure
service for the Nordic research and educational community. It is a member of
GÉANT, which is the pan-European research and education network that
interconnects Europe’s National Research and Education Networks (NRENs).
With
regard to digital services, Sweden provides federated services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 95.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services,
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA
compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Sweden
was a member of an identity federation in 2011.  Sweden is member of eduGAIN
through the Swedish Academic Identity - SWAMID, operated via SUNET.  eduGAINis
a service that is intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
which is  related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the
GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 26 research performing organisations in Sweden answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 32.8% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Sweden shows that 41.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 33.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 25.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 95.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 4.0 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.2 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
For
the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations having or using a
structure for knowledge transfer activities’ and ‘Share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer
activities’, it can be noted that organisations in the ‘ERA not applicable
cluster’ have a relatively high level of implementation. 
For
the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations providing federated
electronic identities for their researchers’, the figure may be an
underestimation. According to official sources, approximately 50 % of all
universities/university colleges in Sweden can provide researchers with
federated electronic identity.
For
the section on open innovation and knowledge transfer, it should be considered
that the major technology engineering organisations did not respond to the ERA
survey.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Funding scheme aimed at most prominent researchers in Sweden || 2013 || X || X 
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Universities autonomy reform || 2010 ||   ||   
 2008 Research Bill || 2008 ||   ||   
 Government Bill 2012/Research and innovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Government Bill 2012/Research and innovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Strategic Research Areas || 2008 ||   ||   
 Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions 
 Strategy for international cooperation in research and research-based innovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Excellence’ funding programs: 2006 and 2008 Linnaeus Grants and the 2009 Strategic Research Areas grants || 2006 ||   ||   
 Nordic Cooperation / Nordforsk / Top-level Research Initiative || 2008 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 National research infrastructure roadmap || 2011 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments to European Spallation Source (ESS), MAX IV || 2009 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Access to MAX IV, ESS and SciFiLab ||   ||   ||   
 Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers 
 Euraxess web portal || 2011 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Incentivize HEI to make international recruitment of prominent researchers || 2013 || X || X 
 Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes 
 Measures to improve competitiveness of doctoral studies || 2013 || X || X 
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Law on gender balance and government instruction to the Swedish Research Council || 2010 ||   ||   
 Delegation for Gender Equality in the Higher Education Sector || 2010 ||   ||   
 Grant for practical equality research during 2013-2014 to Vinnova || 2013 || X || X 
 Vinnmer programme, replaced in 2014 ny Mobility and Growth programme || 2013 || X || X 
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Government Bill 2012/Research and Innovation (research data) || 2012 || X ||   
 Government bill 2012:13:30 Research and Innovation (Scientific publications) || 2012 || X ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Government bill 2012/Research and Innovation || 2012 || X ||   
 Innovation strategy || 2012 || X ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 SwePub database, OpenAccess.org || 2010 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economic
Development and Technology (MEDT) for technology policy, and the Ministry of
Education, Science and Sports (MESS) is in charge of the education and science
sectors as well as sports, with two Directorates: one in charge of higher
education and the other in charge of science. The National Assembly is the top
legislative body, and its two committees (Committee for Education, Science,
Culture, Sport and Youth, and Committee for Economy) are in charge of
discussing the legal and policy documents related to research and development
(R&D) policy. Once cleared by the committees, the main legal documents (the
Law on Research and Development, the National Research and Development
Programme) are passed on to the Assembly for approval. Research support is
provided mainly by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) and by SPIRIT, the
Public Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for the Promotion of
Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Development, Investment and Tourism, which was
established in 2012.
Slovenia
currently supports sectors, strategies and products by funding of eight centres
of excellence, seven competence centres and 17 development centres, which are
all co-funded by structural funds. Annual calls by the Research Agency and
SPIRIT are not limited to any priority field.
In
2010, the country adopted the Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia
(RISS) 2011-2020, which covers virtually all activities in the field of
R&D. It fosters the horizontal coordination of research and innovation
(R&I) policies and a shift towards a target-oriented budget, aiming at a
higher quality of life for all, using a critical reflection of society, an
efficiency in addressing societal challenges and an increased added value per
employee, while providing more and better jobs. The National Higher Education
Master Plan (NHEMP) 2011-2020 was also adopted in 2010 and addresses a number
of issues related with tertiary education. However, these strategies have only
been partly implemented.
The
Smart Specialisation Strategy for the period 2014-2020 period is being
prepared.
In
june 2014, the Council recommended that Slovakia streamlines priorities and
ensure consistency between the 2011 Research and Innovation and the 2013
Industrial Policy Strategies with the upcoming strategies on Smart
Specialisation and Transport, and ensures their prompt implementation and
assessment of effectiveness.
In
terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for
Research and Development (GBAORD) in Slovenia represented EUR 92 per inhabitant
in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant was the same
(EUR 92). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government
expenditures and 0.5 % of gross domestic product (GDP)(Eurostat).
The
analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic
crisis (2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the growth rate of
total GBAORD in Slovenia has been higher than the growth rate of of the total
EU GBAORD. The GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed in Slovenia but less than
the evolution observed in the EU-28.
A
new law has entered into force to strongly promote R&I investment in the
form of tax incentives (100 % tax incentives to stimulate further business
investments in R&D).
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
With
regard to project-based funding, there are no official figures for Slovenia in
2012 and 2013. The Ministry of Education, Science and Sport allocates
structural funds for R&D, based on competitive calls for projects. In
addition, it allocates national funds to finance participation and construction
of ESFRI projects and some other large Ris. This part is allocated
non-competitively. Project-based funding includes researchers’ salaries (up to
50 %).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 24.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is lower than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are applied in Slovenia. Since
2008, the Management Board and Scientific Council of the Slovenian Research
Agency adopted (i) rules on the procedures for (co-)financing and monitoring
the implementation of research activities, and (ii) a methodology for
evaluating applications to calls for proposals which are in line with EU
standards. Funding agencies are independent and they base their decisions on
excellence. There are no thematic priorities.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Slovenia
does not allocate institutional funding for R&D to research performing
organisations. The institutional funding provided under the founder's obligations
comprises part of the administrative costs, the fixed operating costs and the
fixed costs of maintaining and repairing property and equipment. This implies
that institutions have little room for manoeuvre in terms of strategic
management. However "stable" funding is allocated directly to
research groups.  Research groups are evaluated every 3-5 years, which, in rare
cases (cca 5%) may result in discontinued funding of some research groups. In
such a case, the funds are reallocated to another group within the same
institution, so that the total funding on institutional level does not change.
Consequently, "Share of institutional funding allocated on the basis of
institutional assessment" is reported to be 0.
The
National Reform Programme 2013 proposes to increase the institutional funding
that is linked with the regular evaluation of research institutes and
universities.
However,
the situation may evolve in the future because national authorities have
indicated that it is necessary to allocating a larger share of the funding to
the basic institutional funding in order to empower the institutions (research
centres and universities) to develop a strategic management within their
organisations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support
institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower
than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in Slovenia allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Slovenia
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is
lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of Slovenia's participation in the total participation is 0.8
% and the country received 0.4 % of the total European Commission contribution.
FP7 funding represents EUR 74 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per
capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4.5 % of the gross domestic expenditures
on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU
average is 3 % of GERD for the same period). The RISS supports to intensifying
cooperation within the European Union, especially in EU programmes and
networks. Within this, a strong link between public-private research activities
should be formed, further encouraging enterprises to participate with their
R&D activities in the EU multilateral R&D and innovation programmes.
Concerning
joint programming initiatives, the country participates in four of the ten
ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy diet for healthy life and Connecting climate knowledge for Europe.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes in FP7.
In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 39 ERA-Nets, of which seven are
currently still running. The country has also participated in seven ERA-Net
Plus actions - of which three are still running (CORE organic plus, HERA JRP CR
and WSF) - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial
support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Slovenia
participates with Greece, Belgium and Switzerland. Additionally, the country
participates in the European Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a
multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy, which has been developed by the
Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,
Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It
comprises science and technology cooperation across the region, and by the end
of 2013, six scientific clusters had been launched, for example, a cluster in
energy and sustainability research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has not developed a specific policy. However, the RISS exposes the
necessity for strong bilateral cooperation in the field of R&D, especially
with the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China). The RISS also states
that the scientific cooperation should be improved with the most advanced
countries, while for the South-eastern European countries (Western Balkans),
Slovenia should become a 'hosting country for their excellent researchers and
enterprises'. In 2012, the SRA co-financed 584 bilateral projects with 25
countries, which mainly covers the travel expenses of Slovenian researchers
abroad and the daily costs of foreign researchers in Slovenia.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in Slovenia
allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower
than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Slovenia, the organisations do not receive funding
from third countries.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is supported by the Slovenian Research Agency, wich plays the role of the
‘executing agency’ following the lead agency decisions and adopting their
evaluations as the domestic ones. One such case is the case of
Slovenian-Belgian Flemish cooperation, where the Flemish evaluation is taken as
the Slovenian one. The Slovenian Research Agency is a member of the European
Science Foundation Forum on Peer Review. The Slovenian Research Agency
undersigned one Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the unilateral
administration and mutual recognition of evaluation procedures with the
Austrian Science Fund (FWF). In 2014, Slovenia signed a Lead Agency Agreement
(ARRS-OTKA) - Memorandum of Understanding with the Hungarian Scientific
Research Fund, OTKA. When researchers from Slovenia are positively evaluated in
an international peer review but not selected at the calls of the European Research
Council (ERC) or by EUROCORES at the European Science Foundation, they can
present their candidature in national call for the complementary scheme, which
is permanently opened. In terms of interoperability, the legislation is in
favour of cross-border cooperation and some measures have been adopted by the
SRA, but progress is hindered by a single factor: the use of the Slovenian
language. For example, only a few calls for projects/applications are prepared
on a bilingual basis (Slovenian-English): it is the same with the issue of
basic legal documents.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 67.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and can base
their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
Slovenia allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the
country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Slovenia
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN) and European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA). In 2012, the country
contributed 0.02 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN and the
European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation into the development of research infrastructures
included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI)
Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of eight (16 %) of
them. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures (Ris), Slovenia is committed to funding five of them. They are:
CESSDA, DARIAH, ESSurvey , SHARE-ERIC and FAIR. The convention on FAIR has been
ratified by Slovenia, in which the country is planning to invest over EUR 20
million (around EUR 2.1 million in 2013). The Ministry of Education, Science
and Sport allocates national funds to finance participation and construction of
ESFRI projects and some other large Ris. This part is allocated
non-competitively.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Slovenia is involved in two of the seven consortia that adopted the
legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries. The country is member of SHARE-ERIC and of European
Spallation Source Survey (ESS ERIC).
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures, the national Roadmap on Research Infrastructures (RIR) was
published in 2010-2011. The RISS proposes a systematic support to research
infrastructure consortia, which will enable their successful operation,
long-term management and development of integrated services with regards to
specific needs in particular areas, open access, necessary training for users,
efficient use of equipment, and provision of support to users in interpreting
the results. The roadmap includes references to the participation of Slovenia
in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI
Roadmap and includes planned expenditure per ESFRI project. RIR 2011-2020 also
exposes the necessity to enhance the cross-border development of research
infrastructures, especially in fields where comparable research equipment in
Europe or the comparable infrastructure in the neighbourhood is not available.
The National Reform Programme 2014 confirms that Slovenia is implementing the
national programme in the field of research infrastructures and is actively
participating in the establishment of the ERIC. It also indicates that the
upgrading of infrastructure for research and innovation and capacities for
development of excellence in research and innovation, and the promotion of
competence centres, especially those of European interest, will be one of the
investment areas defined in the Partnership Agreement for the use of European
Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Access
to research infrastructures is available to those already established (cf.
Centres of Excellence etc.) as nationals and foreign citizens. However,
Slovenia has quite complex legislation regarding fees for the use of RIs. Since
2009, the European Commission has funded access to five of the research
infrastructures coordinated by Slovenia: TANIJS, P3-IMI-MF, SLONMR, SLONMR, JSI
TRIGA REACTOR.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Slovenia in the
Researchers’ Report 2014
[http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Slovenia
Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
There
were 8774 FTE researchers in Slovenia in 2011. This represents 8.6 researchers
per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference
group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 12.7 in Slovenia
compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7. 
In
2012, 41 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
The
fundamental recruitment system for researchers in public research and higher
education institutions is based on general rules which are mandatory for all
public servants in Slovenia. Additionally, the Slovenian Research Agency, which
is responsible for funding, evaluation and distribution of national public
funds for research activities, provides merit-based, open and transparent rules
on funding different research activities (programmes, projects, young
researchers, international cooperation, science meetings etc.) The Agency
provides transparent procedures for evaluation and selection by public calls.
All criteria and indicators, including the research and bibliometric references
for evaluation and selection, are publicly available through its website.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Slovenian Rectors Conference signed the ‘Charter & Code’ principles in
2008. By May 2014, 5 Slovenian organisations were involved in the Commission’s
Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 3 had received the "HR
Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the
Charter & Code.
The
Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia 2011-2020 sets out to achieve
greater development of human resources by increasing funding. The Strategy aims
to attract excellent research staff with new incentives in the fields of tax,
labour and immigration inter alia, and including the mobility of researchers between
public research organisations and business. The Strategy also provides for more
funds to be available for areas designated as national priorities based on
Slovenia's recognised competencies and competitive advantage in science and
business. In addition, the Strategy calls for national efforts in support of
the development of research careers comparable to international efforts,
regardless of the area of research work, and primarily in conformity with the
premises of the European common framework for the development of careers in
scientific research.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.7 in
2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
The
main idea of the National Higher Education Programme 2011-2020 is that
Slovenian higher education must be of quality and to enable excellent
scientific and research development. Its goals included some which are also
relevant to increasing the quality of doctoral training like the
internationalisation of study programmes, students and professors as well as
research staff. A very successful example of doctoral study is the Jožef Stefan
International Postgraduate School (IPS) established by the Jožef Stefan
Institute (JSI)in 2004 as an independent higher education institution. It is
strongly supported by industry (Gorenje, Kolektor and Salonit) and an
international network of cooperating universities and research institutes from
the European Union, Japan, the USA, and a number of other countries.
One
of the main instruments for funding doctoral candidates in Slovenia is the
Young Researchers, programme. It has a long tradition and has contributed
significantly to increasing the quality and scope of research and to new
recruitment procedures for research teams. Through this programme, Slovenia
strives to renew human resources in research and education organisations,
increase the research capacity of research groups and raise human resource
potential in both the private and public sectors. Young Researchers participate
in basic or applied research projects during their postgraduate studies. They
also sign regular, fixed-term employment contracts. They receive their salaries,
social contributions, and material and non-material costs for research and
postgraduate study.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 7.2% in Slovenia compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation
Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU
doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.4% in
Slovenia compared with 16.9% among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 24.2%. 
The
Slovenian Research Agency annually runs a public call to co-finance renowned
researchers from abroad. It co-finances an uninterrupted three-month working
visit by a renowned foreign researcher to a Slovenian research group with the
aim of improving the research performance of that group and preparing a joint
paper for a top-ranking journal. During these three months, the foreign
researcher must give at least two public lectures that are at least one month apart.
The public call is launched yearly for up to eight renowned foreign researchers
working in the fields of natural, technical, medical, biotechnical, social or
human sciences. Insecure career prospects and low salaries are the main
obstacles to inward mobility of Slovenian researchers. For foreign researchers,
unattractive pay is the main obstacle to moving to Slovenia to work. 
The
Young Researchers Programme stimulates the international mobility of doctoral
candidates.
The
Young Researchers in the Economy programme is designed to introduce more highly
educated staff into private companies and stimulate companies to hire young
graduates to enhance their R&D and innovation activities. The support is
mainly financial, providing co-financing for salaries and some materials costs
for a young researcher who is employed in a company while pursuing a PhD at the
university. Through this support the young researcher engages in research work
with mentoring by both the company and university. The programme was run by
SPIRIT Slovenia in the 2007-2013 financial cycle and was co-financed by the
European Social Fund. The beneficiaries are enterprises and technology centres
− as employers of young researchers, and research organisations and
universities – as providers of formal education.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
fifth priority of RISS 2011-2020 indicates that legal and other barriers should
be removed for improving the recruitment, career progression and retention of women
in science and to focus attention onto the role of gender in research. A
consultative body Commission for women in Science organises debates, publishes
some materials, opens discussions etc. However, the Action Plan for improving
career opportunities for researchers in all career periods, which should detail
the corresponding areas and activities, remains under preparation. Slovenia has
set up a gender equality strategy in research institutions but the gap between
men and women is not markedly large in research.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support
national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within
the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Men
and women are treated equally in all procedures, even after maternity leave,
which can be divided between a man and a woman on the basis of their respective
decision. The law guarantees that after the end of the maternity/paternity
leave, both (men and women) will return to the same positions.
The
Slovenian Scientific Foundation participates in conducting with the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and L’Oréal
programme 'For Women in Science' which grants scholarships for female
researchers (up to three per year).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 49.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However,
the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and
promotion policies for female researchers in the limited compliance cluster is
high.
There
seems to be no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research
programmes.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 45.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey did not indicate
support for the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing
organisations which include the gender dimension in research content in the
limited compliance cluster is high.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision-making, the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport
(MESS) is committed to complying with the principle of gender-balanced
representation in the composition of all bodies appointed in the field of
science, in accordance with the Resolution on the National Programme for Equal
Opportunities for Women and Men for 2010-2011. There is no positive action, for
example in the inclusion of quotas. 
The
Slovenian government has set national targets on the gender composition of
expert bodies, public research institutions and agencies, requiring those
bodies to be composed of a minimum of one-third of both sexes. Within the
Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) there is a Regulation on the operation of
permanent and temporary expert bodies for research, stating that such bodies
should be composed of at least one-third of either gender – one-fifth in
technical sciences.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Slovenia is higher than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access (OA), the Slovenian Research Infrastructure
Roadmap 2011-2020 indicates that results from publicly funded research must be
available to the public. It also points out that digitalisation and public
access of digitalised materials should be systematically regulated and
upgraded.
Related
to open access to publications, there is still no national policy. However,
there are some measures supporting green open access.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 32.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support
open access to publications is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar to that
within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, no specific policy has been identified.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 28.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support open access to data.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing
organisations making publicly funded scientific research data available online
and free of charge is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
However, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific
research data available online and free of charge in the limited compliance
cluster is high.
With
respect to repositories, the RIR exposes the fact that a national repository of
scientific data should be established, stating that storage and access to
scientific data (a national repository) must be provided. Such a central
national repository system, which must have the ability to connect to the
Slovenian current research information system (SICRIS), will connect to EU
repositories, thus increasing the visibility and value (citation) of Slovenian
science worldwide. The national library (NUK),  known as the 'NUK network'
presents an entry point for access to national and international sources and
databases. Some universities’ libraries (Dikul, Dkum, University of Primorska
library) focus more on specific topics and are a deposit for some research
papers, research reports, etc. being produced at their faculties (member of
each university). The Institute of Information Science (IZUM) is a public
institution that is an information infrastructural service for Slovenian
science, culture and education.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, the Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia (RISS)
proposes co-financing, until 2020, activities in the business sector for
strengthening education and training the employed in the R&D area, and
making organisational improvements in this area. It also proposes the following
measures: the regulation of intellectual property rights among stakeholders for
the commercialisation of research results and the establishment of support for
patenting by public research organisations (PROs). The current legislation
makes it very difficult for PROs or higher educational institutions (HEIs) to
establish a spin-off, since it requires special permission to be issued by the
government. Funding organisations are not supporting the professionalisation of
knowledge transfer activities. 
Strategic
partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas
between academia and industry are supported in Slovenia. The establishment of
centres of excellence and centres of competence seek to bridge the gap between academia
and industry. The eight centres of excellence are high-quality
multidisciplinary groups of researchers from both academic and business
spheres, combining critical mass of knowledge and adequate research
infrastructure for a potential breakthrough to top-level science and/or for
inclusion in international networks of excellence. They contribute to the
efficient flow of knowledge and applications into products and services. 
Seven
competence centres are defined as research development centres, run by
industrial partners, which connect partners from the economic and public
research sectors, and aim at strengthening development capability and the use
of new technologies for the development of new competitive products, services
and processes in the priority areas of technological development. Also, the
Research Voucher programme helps enterprises to commission research at R&D
institutes and HEIs for a period of three years. Funding is allocated on a
first come, first served basis. Furthermore, there is support for the
implementation of research training agreements with private sector
organisations and to structured programmes for placements in the private sector
for researchers.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support
KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector in the limited
compliance cluster is high.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of
research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge
transfer activities in the limited compliance cluster is high.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of
research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge
transfer activities in the limited compliance cluster is high.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research personnel whose primary
occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster, but it is quite important in the
case of the limited compliance to ERA cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
As
regards the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a
research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.
ARNES is the Slovenian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a
specialised internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the
research and education communities within the country. Concerning the
development of e-infrastructures, the Slovenian Research Agency channels the
funding for the development of digitalisation and knowledge access for all
Slovenian libraries and the interested public (COBISS), notably through its
infrastructural financing. Because it is funded by public funds, COBISS is
available for all internet users.
Concerning
digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, and
premium services, such as consultancy services.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 38.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations
providing digital research services in the limited compliance cluster is high.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Slovenia
was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is also a member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) partners' federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of
research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities to
their researchers in the limited compliance cluster is high.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 19 research performing organisations in Slovenia answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 17.1% of the total number of researchers in the
country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Slovenia shows that 15.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 68.4 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 15.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 13.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 80.5 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA
principles are not applicable.
However,
it should be highlighted that two major RPOs did not respond to the survey.
Also, the high share of institutions in the limited ERA compliant cluster may
reflect the fact that one tool to foster ERA is performance based institutional
funding, which is non existant in Slovenia.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 National smart specialisation strategy || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Methodology for evaluating applications, adopted by the Slovenian Research Agency to calls for proposals || 2008 ||   ||   
 Law on Research and Development || 2011 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Memorandum of Understanding on the unilateral administration and mutual recognition of evaluation procedures with the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) || 2010 ||   ||   
 Memorandum of Understanding with the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund, OTKA || 2014 || X || X 
 Lead agency agreement with Flemish Research Foundation || 2012 || X ||   
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia and the Research Infrastructure Roadmap || 2011 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 Euraxess SI ||   ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 GENDER-NET (ERA-NET project) || 2013 || X || X 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 ||   ||   
 Normative act of Slovenian Research Agency (SRA) || 2008 ||   ||   
 Principle of Equal Treatment Act || 2004 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 Slovenian tax guide 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Development centres Centres of excellence Competence centres || 2010 ||   ||   
 Co-financing of PhD training programme || 2010 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia and the Research Infrastructure Roadmap || 2011 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economy (ME)
and the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sports (MESRS). The latter
is the highest governmental body responsible for policy- and decision-making in
the field of science and technology. 
The
national science and technology policy is prepared and coordinated by the MESRS
in cooperation with other ministries, the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS),
higher education institutions (HEIs), associations of employers, and industrial
research organisations. The Slovak Government Council for Science, Technology
and Innovations (SGCI)  is the most important body for the coordination of
science and technology (S&T) policies and coordinates central government
agencies involved in the development of the knowledge-based economy. 
The
main public bodies responsible for allocating research funds are the Ministry
of Education, Science, Research and Sports (MESRS) and the Slovak Academy of
Science (SAS). Both the MESRS and SAS have their own chapters in the State
Budget Laws. The MESRS directly funds the HEIs, the Research and Development
Agency (RDA) and the VEGA (Scientific Grant Agency, Grantová agentúra ) and
KEGA (Cultural and Educational Grant Agency) grant agencies (addressing higher
education as well as the Academy of Sciences; and humanities, respectively).
The MESRS also manages the Structural Fund Agency (ASFEU). The ASFEU is the
implementing agency for the Operational Programme 'Research Development', a
major source of European funding for the Slovak research system. The RDA
provides for tendering and funding grants to public and private research
bodies. The agency has become an increasingly important source of finance for
many Research and development (R&D) activities, in particular applied
research. The SAS consists of 69 research organisations, of which 48 are
budgetary and 21 are subsidised.
At
the end of 2013, the country adopted the Research and Innovation Strategy for
Smart Specialisation of the Slovak Republic (RIS3) of Slovakia. It presents
several far-reaching reforms: (i) merging eight incumbent research, development
and innovation (RDI) government agencies into two: the Science Agency and the
Technology Agency; (ii) changing the proportion of support to basic and applied
research from the current ratio of 2:1 to 1:2 by 2020; (iii) introducing a
‘mandatory indicator of the state support to R&D as a percentage of GDP
[gross domestic product] in the State Budget Law’, and (iv) re-organising HEIs
and transforming the Slovak Academy of Sciences.
In
June 2014, the Council recommended that Slovakia Improves the quality and
relevance of the science base.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Slovakia
represented EUR 55 per inhabitant in 2012 (compared to an average of EUR 179 in
the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant declined to EUR 49. In 2012, the
total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 %
of gross domestic product (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic
crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD
in Slovakia has been higher than the growth rate of total EU GBAORD. The GBAORD
as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Slovakia, even when it regressed at
the EU-28 level.
The
2013 National Reform Programme indicated that overall expenditures on science,
research and innovation should amount to 1.2 % of GDP in 2020. Amendments to
the Act on Research and Development Incentives and the Act on the Organisation
of State Support for Research and Development should ensure ‘clear, predictable
and equal criteria’ for the funding of R&D in public research organisations
(PROs) and private companies. According to the NRP, the PROs will be better
motivated to ‘improve cooperation with the private sector and recruit
high-quality researchers’.
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
Public
HEIs can apply for three types of national research grants. These are provided
by the VEGA Grant Agency, the KEGA Grant Agency and the Research and
Development Agency (RDA). The VEGA grants supporting basic research in HEIs and
the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS) are traditionally labelled as institutional
funding (in terms of being designed solely for public HEIs and the SAS) but are
allocated on a competitive basis. The KEGA grants supported pedagogic
innovations in HEIs. The competitive RDA grants fund basic and applied research
in all HEIs, the SAS and private research bodies. In 2012, the SAS allocated
around 15.9 % of its budget as project-based (not accounting structural and
investment funding, Seventh Framework Programme projects and other sources of
income). Slovak HEIs and the SAS also participated in projects funded from the
structural and investment funds (the Operational Programme 'Research and
Development' (OPRD) and the Operational Programme 'Education' (OPE). The
projects were channelled via the Structural Fund Agency of the Ministry of
Education, Science, Research and Sports.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey and support
project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review are used to evaluate all national
public competitive funding. The rules for the VEGA, KEGA and the Research and
Development Agency (RDA) grants are that applications are peer-reviewed. One
peer reviewer should be foreign researcher. These agencies and accreditation
commissions mostly engage experts from the Czech Republic (for reason of
language and cultural proximity) or Slovak citizens employed with foreign
higher education and research institutions. The structural and investment fund
projects are evaluated by the domestic evaluators only.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Funding
to RPOs is partly allocated based on institutional assessment. 
For
HEI, the MESRS while defining the amount of subsidy for research, development
or artistic activities, the research, development or artistic capacity of the
public higher education institution, the achieved results in the field of
science, technology or art, evaluation of research, development, artistic and
other creative activity of the public higher education institution by
Accreditation Commission within the framework of complex accreditation and
classification of the public higher education institution among research
universities, university-type higher education institutions or non-university
type higher education institutions, are decisive, Other criteria for funding
allocation includes: share of a HEI in total foreign R&D grants for Slovak
HEIs; share of a HEI in total domestic R&D grants for Slovak HEIs; share of
a HEI in total number of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) students in Slovakia; share
of a HEI in total scientific publications in Slovakia; and share of a HEI in
total art output in Slovakia. The Accreditation Commission of the Slovak
Government evaluates the higher education institutions every six years. 
The
organisations of the SAS have been evaluated regularly by their own
Accreditation Commission since 1992. The scientometric indicators prepared by
the independent Academic Ranking and Rating Agency were used to assist the work
of the Accreditation Commission for the first time. There is a limited link
between the evaluation results and support to particular institutes in the SAS.
In 2013, the SAS could re-distribute 5 % of the total wage budget based on
evaluation results.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate
institutional funding.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral
and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support transnational cooperation.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Slovakia
dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is zero.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of Slovakia's participation in the total participation is 0.4
% and the country received 0.2 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7
funding represents EUR 13 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita)
for the 2007-2013 period and 4 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D
(GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of
GERD for the same period).
Concerning
Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in three of the
ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases
(Alzheimer), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe
and Healthy diet for healthy life.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes in FP7. In
Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing
initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 14 ERA-Nets, of which five are currently
still running. The country has also participated in three ERA-Net Plus actions
- of which one is still running - in areas with high European added value and
additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.
Concerning
research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, the 2010
New Model of Financing Science and Technology in Slovakia makes the MESRS
responsible for the country's participation in cross-border initiatives and it
is allocated a budget of EUR 1 million for its activities. Fifteen multilateral
schemes support joint research agendas, both with ERA countries and outside the
ERA. Slovakia has concluded bilateral agreements on scientific and
technological cooperation with the following countries: Austria, Bulgaria,
Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal,
Serbia, Slovenia, and Spain. In 2012, bilateral schemes supported 135 projects
(EUR 0.3 million) with seven ERA countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Romania, the
Czech Republic, France, Portugal and Slovenia) and 15 projects (EUR 35 000)
with Serbia. Support to mobility schemes did not aim at specific joint research
agendas. Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the
Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has
been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube
region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,
Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and
Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region
and, by the end of 2013, six scientific clusters had been launched, for example
a cluster on energy and sustainability research.
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the most
important agreements outside the ERA referred to Slovakia’s participation in
the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna (Russia). There are also
bilateral agreements on scientific and technological cooperation with the
following countries: China, Egypt, India, the Republic of South Africa, the
Russian Federation, South Korea, Ukraine and the United States of America.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support international cooperation with third countries.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research and development
budget originating from third countries amongst research performing
organisations which answered the survey is higher within the EU's ERA-compliant
cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
The
Slovak 172/2005 Law on the Organisation of the State Support to Research and
Development does not allow for interoperability of national R&D programmes,
with the exception of bilateral and multilateral cooperation programmes outside
joint programming initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support the allocation of project-based funding on peer- reviewed
decisions made by non-national institutions.
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not
allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by
non-national institutions.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Slovakia
participates in the following large international research infrastructures:
European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire
(CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Synchrotron
Radiation Facility (ESRF), European x-ray free election laser (EU.XFEL) and
Institute Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.9 % of the
GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the ESRF, the ILL and the
European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of three (6 %) of them. The
"Action plan for building R&D in Slovakia" announces the
continued support to the Slovak participation in the ESFRI Roadmap projects in
which the country is involved: European XFEL, ESRF, ILL 20/20, ESSurvey, FAIR
and PRACE. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these
research infrastructures, Slovakia is currently committed to funding one of
them: European XFEL.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium
(ERIC), Slovakia is not involved in any of the consortia that adopted the legal
framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and
operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several
European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures, Slovakia is preparing the Action plan for building R&D in
Slovakia. It will propose to build infrastructures that are linked to priority
areas for research and development, concentrating on a critical mass of human
potential, the necessary technical infrastructure and the necessary
competencies of coordination and management. It is expected that the action
plan will be connected with the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI
roadmap.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
terms of access to research infrastructures, access is provided for foreign
researchers under bilateral and multilateral schemes in S&T cooperation.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for Slovakia in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Slovakia
_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
There
were 15326 FTE researchers in Slovakia in 2011. This represents 5.7 researchers
per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference
group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 0.2 in Slovakia
compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 43.7
In
2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012). 
In
the Slovak Republic, institutions generally implement their own recruitment
policy. The autonomy of the institutions cannot be influenced by the State.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
Rector’s Conference as well as the Slovak Academy of Sciences have adopted and
are implementing the ‘Charter & Code’ principles.
By
May 2014, 2 Slovak organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human
Resources Strategy for Researchers.
There
are several measures to increase researchers’ funding opportunities in
Slovakia. The VEGA – the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education,
Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic and the Slovak Academy of
Sciences – offers scientific grants in the fields of basic research in all
fields of science. Created in 1996, VEGA is one of the basic financial tools of
project-based funding, with a budget of approximately EUR 10 million each year.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.9 in
2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
In
2007, the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak
Republic established the Agency of the Slovak Republic for the Structural Funds
of EU (ASFEÚ). Its main objective is to ensure the continuous process of
acceptance, assessment, financial management and monitoring of projects funded
under the EU Structural Funds for the period 2007–13. It carries out activities
as the managing authority for the Operational Programme Education and
Operational Programme Research and Development. One of the priority axes under
the Operational Programme Education is Axis 2 ‘Life-long Learning as the Basic
Principle of a Knowledge Society’ with the aim of supporting life-long learning
in different R&D sectors and increasing the quality of education. In
addition, the update of the Long-Term Plan of the State Science and Technology
Policy by 2015 (Phoenix Strategy) promotes life-long learning activities by
supporting joint doctoral programmes in English, developing lifelong learning
training courses at a post-doc level and encouraging international cooperation
schemes between Slovak and foreign institutions.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27
Member State was 6.7% in Slovakia compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union
reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral
candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.4% in Slovakia
compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average
of 24.2%. 
The
Slovak Research and Development Agency under the “Programme for Human Potential
Support in R&D and Science Popularisation” promotes projects oriented
towards the reintegration of citizens of the Slovak Republic with a PhD who had
spent more than two years continuously working at research and development
institutions abroad. The Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of
the Slovak Republic is promoting bilateral cooperation programmes with twelve
EU and non-EU countries, thus encouraging scientific collaboration and mobility
of researchers. The bilateral calls for cooperation are managed by the Slovak
Research and Development Agency (SRDA) and involve the following countries:
Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, China, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy,
Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Serbia, South Africa,
and Ukraine.
The
update of The Long-term Plan of the State Science and Technology Policy by 2015
(Phoenix Strategy) encourages researchers to move from the public to the
business sector. The SIEA (the Slovak Innovation and Energy Agency) was
established under the Ministry of Economy to boost business sector innovation
and to support innovation. The Agency aims to strengthen the links between
industry and research through the creation of regional innovation structures
involving municipalities, universities, academy institutes and firms.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
Slovakia
adopted a number of legislative measures to ensure gender equality in general:
the Slovak Constitution (2001), Labour Code Law (2011) and the 365/2004
Antidiscrimination Law pronounce on gender equality. There are no specific
actions in support of gender equality in science. This may be explained by the
fact that Slovakia accounted for above-average rates of female researcher
employment in the R&D sector (42.6 % in Slovakia in 2003-2011, 32.4 % in
the EU-27 in 2003-2009). The Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS) started
monitoring gender balance in science in 2000.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey did not
declare any support to gender equality in public research. No RPO seem to have
adopted Gender Equality Plans.
All
women in Slovakia are entitled up to the three years maternity leave. The
Labour Code (Law No 311/2001) guarantees their return to the same type of work.
The only exception to this rule is the fixed-term contract, which does not
guarantee the right for returning to the same type of work after maternity
leave.
SAS
established the Gender Equality Commission in 2005. The cultural change
policies are fostered via the Central Information Portal for Science and Technology
(2013) which publishes information on Slovak female scientists: the success
stories, interviews and profiles of excellent female Slovak researchers. The
information is part of the strategy on the 'popularisation of science'.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Some
public sector bodies collect evidence on gender issues in science. In 2005, the
SAS started to follow gender-mainstreaming policies and established the
Commission on Gender Equality to collect statistics on women's participation in
doctoral studies, academic funding and evaluation bodies, and managerial posts.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support the inclusion of gender dimension in research
content/programmes.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing
organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
Concerning
gender balance in decision-making, no legal provisions are in place to improve
gender representation in academic and research committees, boards and governing
bodies.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment
committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in Slovakia is equal to 0.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access, the Long-term Objective of the State S&T
Policy up to 2015 supports modernising the infrastructure and improving access
to scientific information by Slovak scientists and the business sector. Two
national projects promoting the access to and the preservation of scientific
information to the scientific community, university students and businesses
were carried out by the Slovak Centre of Scientific and Technical Information
(SCST), the national information centre and the specialised scientific library
of Slovakia. However, there does not seem to be an explicit policy existing on
open access (OA).
With
regard to open access to publications, no specific policy has been identified.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support OA to publications.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of publicly funded scientific
publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, no specific policy has been identified.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 36 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 36.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Research
funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have
measures to support open access to data.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing
organisations making scientific research data systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
With
regard to repositories, Slovakia is the project 'Infrastructure for research
and development – the data centre for research and development', with the aim
of building a data centre that will store, process, and provide access to
information that is needed by Slovak scientific organisations while carrying
out their R&D activities.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, Slovakia has embedded knowledge transfer in its RIS3, which
fosters the open circulation of knowledge between companies and research
organisations. The strategy implementation will be accompanied by a monitoring
system. One of the specific measures mentioned in the strategy is the
development of innovative capacities through cooperation between enterprises
and research institutions in key sectors of the Slovak economy, which is
accompanied by specific funding. 
The
Centre of Patent Information in Slovakia is a contact point of the Industrial
Property Office of Slovakia and its main mission is to provide researchers and
the public with basic information about the possibilities of industrial and
legal protection of technological solutions, inventions, trademarks and designs
in the country and abroad. The Technology Transfer Centre (SCSTI) participates
in building and operating on the national system of technology transfer support
and is responsible for the administration and operation of the national
technology transfer portal. It supports the establishment and development of
local technology transfer offices (TTOs) and provides information and
professional support to research and scientific organisations in the technology
transfer processes, starting with intellectual property (IP) protection and
ending with its commercialisation. 
The
project called National infrastructure for supporting technology transfer in
Slovakia, which is partly funded by the European Regional Development Fund,
supports R&D activities that reflect the real needs of the entrepreneurial
sector. At the same time, it supports the creation of long-term partnerships
between academy and industry. This project will end in 2014. 
In
June 2014, the Council of the European Union recommended that Slovakia
implements plans to foster effective knowledge transfer and co-operation
between academia, research and business. Strategic partnership in the form of
support to the creation of consortia for solving multidisciplinary problems and
embedding sectors through clusters and other forms of networking will be
supported through the implementation of the RIS3.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 39.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 32.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey did not indicated
support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research performing
organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing
organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research performing
organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities
is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research personnel whose
primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower
than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster, but quite high in the limited
compliance to ERA cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a
research and education network, which is essential to make digital services
possible. The policies for research and education-related public
e-infrastructures and for associated digital research services are implemented
by the Slovak Academic Network (SANET), which is a member of GÉANT. The SANET
is an independent civil association (non-profit body), whose members agreed
with the conditions to provide each other with Internet services. By 2013, the
SANET had 322 members (including all Slovak universities, institutes of the
Slovak Academy of Sciences, scientific libraries, primary and secondary schools
and several state institutions and municipalities). In 2013, Slovakia reported
backbone capacities of 100 GBps (Gigabytes per second).
Concerning
digital services, several institutions are members of the Trans-European
Research and Education Networking Association, which offers a forum to
collaborate, innovate and share knowledge in order to foster the development of
Internet technology, infrastructure and services to be used by the research and
education community. In 2013, there were 38 HEIs, 20 research institutes, seven
institutes of further education and six libraries connected to TERENA in
Slovakia. This represents between 60 % and 80 % of the universities and less
than half of the other institutions.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 36 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 21.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
Slovakia
has not joined an identity federation and the country is not a member of
eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information
related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT
(GN3plus) partners' federations.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations
providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is similar to
that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 24 research performing organisations in Slovakia answered the 2014 ERA
survey, which represents 7.9% of the total number of researchers in the country
(total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in Slovakia shows that 16.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’
cluster, 54.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster
and 29.2 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster.
However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in
each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of
‘weighted’ organisations are 40.6 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 41.2 % for
the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 18.2 % for those organisations where
ERA principles are not applicable.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 Research and Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation of the Slovak Republic || 2013 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 The 172/2005 Law on Organisation of State support to R&D || 2005 ||   ||   
 The Fenix Strategy: Update of the Long-Term Objective of the State Science and Technology Policy up to 2015 (adopted by Government Resolution 461/2011) Minerva 2.0 for the knowledge-based economy || 2011 ||   ||   
 New Model of Financing Science and Technology in the Slovak Republic || 2010 ||   ||   
 Amendment of Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) || 2012 || X ||   
 Evaluation procedures and criteria for the 2010-2012 general call || 2010 ||   ||   
 Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) Act 133/2002 on the Slovak Acedemy of Sciences (SAS) || 2002 ||   ||   
 Competitive grants || 2000 ||   ||   
 Rules of evaluation by the Accreditation Commission for the HEIs and the Slovak Academy of Sciences Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) || 2007 ||   ||   
 Institutional funding ||   ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Strategy for excellent science, research and development || 2013 || X || X 
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Information on International Co-operation in Science and Technology in 2011 (MESRS 2012) || 2012 || X ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Joint Programming Initiatives, Article 185, COST, EUREKA || 2010 ||   ||   
 Bilateral co-operation in science and technology || 1980 ||   ||   
 Visegrad fund || 2000 ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Infrastructure of Research and Development - strategy and draft roadmap || 2011 ||   ||   
 The Cyclotron Centre || 1999 ||   ||   
 Participation in ESFRI Activities Participation in infrastructures of European interest ||   ||   ||   
 Centre of Excellence Programme || 2007 ||   ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Bilateral and multilateral co-operation in science and technology ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 General labour market measures The 404/2001 Law on Residence by Foreigners The Decree of the Government of the Slovak Republic No. 391/2004 Draft amendment of Law on Qualification Degree Documents || 2011 ||   ||   
 The European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers || 2011 ||   ||   
 EURAXESS Slovakia || 2004 ||   ||   
 Human Resources in Research and Development and Popularisation (2006-2010) || 2006 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Central Information Portal for Science and Technology || 2004 ||   ||   
 The Slovak Constitution (2001) The Labour Code Law (Law No. 311/2001) The 365/2004 Antidiscrimination Law || 2004 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 Infrastructure for research and development - Data centre for research and development || 2007 ||   ||   
 Operational Programme Research and Development projects: National information system supporting research and development in Slovakia Infrastructure for research and development - Data centre for research and development || 2009 ||   ||   
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 National infrastructure for supporting technology transfer in Slovakia || 2010 ||   ||   
 Technology transfer centre SCSTI ||   ||   ||   
 Centre of Patent Information in Slovakia || 2011 ||   ||   
 MESRS call supporting five clusters initiatives || 2012 || X ||   
 Operational Programme Research and Development projects: Transfer of knowledge and technology from research and development into practice || 2008 ||   ||   
 Strategy to create a national technology transfer system || 2013 || X || X 
 Establishment conditions to foster cooperation between academy and industry Reassessment of IP rules || 2013 || X || X 
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 Slovak Academic Network (SANET). || 1992 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Membership of the TERENA network TLS/SSL server certificates via SANET TCS Server || 2011 ||   ||   
1.  
MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS
  
1.1.   Research and innovation system
Research
and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills (BIS) which plays the lead executive role in research
issues. It has oversight for the majority of research and development (R&D)
policy formulation, and is the main author of strategic policies for R&D
and innovation. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
provides funds for the seven Research Councils, each organised on a broad
disciplinary basis, which in turn support R&D both in higher education
institutions (HEIs) and in their own institutions. Research Councils develop
their specific R&D policies.
The
country adopted the Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth in 2011. It
sets out the government's approach to boosting business investment in
innovation and ensuring the United Kingdom's success in the global economy. It
indicates that investments will focus on critical areas that only government
can fund. The National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 announces the adoption of a
new strategy for research and innovation before the end of 2014. It also
indicates that actions in support of the eight great technologies have been
developed in partnership with the United Kingdoms's Research Councils,
Technology Strategy Board and Foresight projects conducted by the Government
Office for Science. The Welsh Government’s strategy, Science for Wales, adopted
in 2012, seeks to attract world-class scientific talent to Wales and to
generate critical mass in key areas of scientific research through the creation
of three new national research networks in the grand challenge areas.
In
terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget
Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in the United
Kingdom represented EUR 174 per inhabitant in 2012, slightly below the EU-28
average (EUR 179.2). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.2 % of total
government expenditures and 0.57% of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat). 
The
analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis
(2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in
the United Kingdom has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD.
However, the GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in the United Kingdom
than the regression observed in the EU-28.
However,
government support is also provided for business in the form of R&D tax
credits. In the financial year ending March 2012, R&D tax credits provided
almost GBP 1.2 billion of relief to over 12 000 companies, supporting around
GBP 11.9 billion of expenditure (NRP2014). 
In
the 'Spending Round 2013' publication, the government announced it would
maintain resource funding for science in nominal terms at GBP 4.6 billion in
2015-2016 and increase capital funding in real terms from GBP 0.6 billion in
2012-2013 to GBP 1.1 billion in 2015-2016. The government also set a long-term
capital budget for science in the next Parliament, which will grow in line with
inflation through to 2020-2021 (NRP 2014).
  
1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer
review
As
regards project-based funding, public funding is allocated via a process that
is firmly based on open calls for proposals with independent evaluations and
peer reviews using national and international reviewers.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 80 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.
The
core principles of international peer review prevail in the assessment of
proposals for research funding. Proposals are assessed for scientific quality
by a number of senior academics or peers, from the United Kingdom and overseas,
who work within relevant areas of research. This assessment or
"review" provides the basis of the funding decision. The peer review
processes employed are designed to be sensitive to the different needs and cultures
that exist within the academic community and also reflect the variety of
mechanisms employed to support different types of research e.g. basic or
strategic research, or the need to encourage adventurous or multidisciplinary
research.
  
1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment
Institutional
funding is almost always allocated based on institutional assessment. The
government allocates block institutional funding (for research) via the Higher
Education Funding Councils and their equivalents. The vast majority of the
money is divided between institutions using formulae to determine each one’s
share. These formulae take into account certain factors for each institution,
including the number and type of students, the subjects taught and the amount
and quality of research. Funding allocation is linked to the volume of research
(using research-active staff numbers), the relative costs (reflecting, for
example, that laboratory-based research is more expensive than library-based
research), any government policy priorities for particular subjects and the
quality of research as measured in the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). The
Research Excellence Framework (REF), a process of expert review, is the new
system for assessing the quality of research in the United Kingdom's (HEIs)
higher education institutions (HEIs). It will replace the Research Assessment
Exercise (RAE) and will be completed in 2014. The primary purpose of the REF is
to produce assessment outcomes for each submission made by institutions which
the funding bodies intend to use to inform the selective allocation of their
research funding to HEIs, with effect from 2015-2016. The assessment outcomes
provide benchmarking information and establish reputational yardsticks. The criteria
used in REFs are quality of outputs: - ‘originality, significance and rigour’-,
impacts: - ‘reach’ and ‘significance’ -; and research environment: - ‘vitality
and sustainability’ -.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 20 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is
lower than the EU average.
2.  
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
  
2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas
The
country is involved in transnational cooperation. It also strongly supports
bilateral and multilateral initiatives.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders’ total budget in the United Kingdom allocated to
transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders’ research and development budget in the United
Kingdom dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU
organisations is lower than the EU average.
Cooperation
between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries
is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7), the share of the United Kingdom's participation in the total
participation is 14.7 % and the country received 16.1 % of the total European
Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 92 per inhabitant (the EU
average is EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.7 % of the gross
domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last
available data) (the EU average is 3% of GERD for the same period). Scottish EU
Research and Innovation Steering Group was established in 2010 to help support
the increased participation in European research and innovation programmes. One
of the aims of the Steering Group is to ensure that businesses, the academic
community and those in the public sector and research and technology
organisations are fully informed about and able to respond to the opportunities
within Horizon 2020 (NRP 2014).
As
regards Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all ten of
the ongoing initiatives and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are
Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food security, Agriculture and climate
change, Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe,
Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The demographic change (More years, better
life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health,
Connecting climate knowledge for Europe, Water challenges for a changing world,
Healthy and productive seas and oceans", and Urban Europe - Global
Challenges, Local Solutions.
In
terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called
Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes in FP7.
In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in the four ongoing
initiatives.
ERA-Nets
facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research
programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for
transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes.
The country has participated in a total of 102 ERA-Nets, of which 26 are
currently still running. The country has also participated in 11 ERA-Net Plus
actions - of which seven are still running - in areas with high European added
value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for
proposals.
The
Economic and Social Research Council is a partner in the Open Research Area in
Europe for the Social Sciences (ORA), which currently involves four European
Member States (the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands).
  
2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions
In
terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the
country has developed a suite of routes for engagement which are presented in
the 2010 Research Councils United Kingdom (RCUK) International Strategy. It
outlines the ways in which RCUK helps the best researchers work together,
wherever they are in the world. In terms of implementation, specific agreements
have been notably signed with the United States of America (USA), China, India
and Brazil. Recently the United Kingdom and China signed an agreement of STR 50
million to carry out joint innovative research programmes to tackle global
issues like climate change, long-term renewable energy supplies and human
diseases. 
In
addition, the United Kingdom has several bilateral science and technology
agreements with third countries. The Open Research Area in Europe for the
Social Sciences (ORA) is bringing in third country participants (India and the
United States of America). In the third and most recent joint call, the
programme will fund integrated projects realised by researchers from three or
more of the five participating countries, in any combination. In addition, the
Belmont Forum is a high-level group of the world's major and emerging funders
of global environmental change research and international science councils. It
was co-founded by the United Kingdom Natural Environment Research Council and
the National Science Foundation (USA) in 2009.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of responding funders' research and development budget in the United
Kingdom allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries
is lower than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of organisations'
research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than
that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.
  
2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other
schemes
Mutual
recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards
is supported where conditions are appropriate by the RCUK. In these
circumstances the lead agency procedure can be applied, where the participating
funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international
projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are
being performed in their respective countries. RCUK has signed Memoranda of
Understanding providing for a lead agency agreement with the State of São Paulo
Research Foundation (FAPESP), the United States National Science Foundation
(NSF) and in 2013 with Fonds National de la Recherche (FNR) in Luxembourg.
The
RCUK is also working with Science Europe to develop a better evidence base for
the perceived barriers to cross-border interoperability of national programmes
and to consider options for the removal of such barriers where necessary. All
seven of the United Kingdom's Research Councils are members of Science Europe.
The President of Science Europe, currently Professor Paul Boyle (ESRC CEO), is
a member of the Governing Board of the Global Research Council, a voluntary,
informal organisation of heads of research councils from around the world, with
the remit to find mutually acceptable paths to greater international research
collaboration. Some high-level principles were signed off at the first meeting
of the Global Research Council policy forum in May 2012. Work is underway at a
global level, and based on recent policy activity between European research
funding and performing organisations, to develop a set of commonly agreed
criteria for peer reviews.
In
RCUK Lead Agency arrangements the UK is usually the lead agency, due to the
internationally renowned peer review and reputation for funding excellence.
RCUK work in close collaboration with international funding partners and build
capacity wherever possible.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer
reviews carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.
The
share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in
the United Kingdom allocated through peer review carried out by institutions
outside the country is higher than the EU average.
3.  
RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES
  
3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI,
national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest
In
2012, the United Kingdom contributed 1.9 % of the GBAORD to the activities
carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the
European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory
(ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut
Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)
in 2012. The country also participates in the European Space Agency (ESA) and
the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA)  (Eurostat).
In
terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included
in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the
country participates in the preparatory phase of 15 of them (i.e. 30 %). The
country coordinates six of them: ESSurvey, HIPER, ELIXIR,INSTRUCT, ISBE and
SKA. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research
infrastructures, the United Kingdom is so far committed to fund nine of them:
ESSurvey, HIPER, ELIXIR, EMBRC, INFRAFRONTIER, INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, ILL
20/20 and SKA. So far, UKRC has dedicated  GBP 66.6 M (EUR 83.9 M) in the
preparatory and/or construction phasis of the research infrastructures included
in the ESFRI roadmap.
With
regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortiums
(ERIC), the United Kingdom (UK) hosts ESS ERIC and is a member of EURO-ARGO
ERIC, two of the six consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by
the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research
infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.
In
terms of support to the development and implementation of research
infrastructures (RIs), the United Kingdom's national roadmap on research
infrastructures was replaced in 2012 by the RCUK's document "Investing for
Growth: Capital Infrastructure for the 21st Century". It reflects changes
to the United Kingdom's capital funding allocations. Funding for large
facilities and infrastructure is available from the Research Councils,
government departments, Regional Development Agencies, devolved
administrations, charities, the private sector, the European Commission and
other international bodies. A particular source of funding is the Large
Facilities Capital Fund, which is administered by central government. A number
of the facilities that appear in the ESFRI Roadmap also featured in the RCUK's
Large Facilities Roadmap. 
The
2012 RCUK Strategic Framework for Capital Investment outlines where capital
investment is important so as to ensure sustainability of the research base in
the medium to long term, including large facilities as previously described in
the Large Facilities Roadmap and other significant capital priorities. In 2013,
GBP 600 million was earmarked for funding the development of infrastructures
and facilities. Finally, the Research Partnerships Investment Fund 2012-2015
supports large-scale projects that are able to leverage substantial co-investment
from private sources in order to enhance the research facilities of higher
education institutions undertaking world-leading research. It will secure GBP 1
billion investment in university research infrastructure. It has been extended
until 2016-2017, providing at least GBP 100 million (circa EUR 125 million) of
matched funding each year to leverage private investment in science
infrastructure.
  
3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest
Access
to the United Kingdom's research infrastructures is open to all UK and non-UK
nationals who are registered as UK academics (in a UK HEI or Research Council
Institute); postdoctoral researchers from UK universities; those applying via
EU transnational access arrangements (the level of access is in accordance with
agreed EU funding levels); overseas organisations that have contractual access
agreements with the relevant facilities. In addition, applications from
overseas (non-EU or without prior contractual access arrangement) are also
considered.
4.  
OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS
  
4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers
A
detailed report can be found in the country profile for United Kingdom in the
Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/United
Kingdom_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].
The
following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent
progress made in several key areas.
There
were 251,358 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the United Kingdom in
2011. This represents 8.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6
among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU
average of 6.7.
  
4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers
In
2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs
portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 54.8 in the United
Kingdom, compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an
EU average of 43.7.
In
2012, 78 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to
which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their
institution (More2 survey, 2012).
Higher
education institutions in the United Kingdom are fully autonomous in designing
and implementing their recruitment policy. They are required to publish all
relevant policies on their websites. The procedure is time-consuming and
costly, and as a result the advertising of posts is sometimes avoided. The
United Kingdom's higher education (HE) funding bodies have encouraged action to
face this challenge. For instance, the Higher Education Funding Council for
England (HEFCE) encourages the institutions to have formal human resources
strategies and provides funding to support these strategies under the Rewarding
and Developing Staff in HE initiative. HEFCE also encourages institutions to
develop recruitment and retention schemes.
  
4.3.   Attractive careers
The
European Charter & Code for Researchers is being implemented through both
the Quality Assurance Agency and the Concordat to Support the Career
Development of Researchers. Vitae, which champions world-class support for
researchers and research staff, leads in the implementation of the Concordat
and assists higher institutions in the United Kingdom to exchange knowledge and
good practices.  Vitae also supports them in gaining the European Commission’s
Human Resources (HR) Excellence in Research Award.
By
May 2014, 89 UK organisations had received the "HR Excellence in
Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.
The implementation of the Concordat is reviewed annually by the Concordat
Strategy Group, and a report is also submitted to government.
  
4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes
The
number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.4 in
2011, compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU
average of 1.7.
All
Research Councils in the United Kingdom concentrate their funding for doctoral
training on the basis of quality. This is a result of funding constraints and
the policy objective of improving the quality of doctoral training in the
United Kingdom and striving for excellence. RCUK have developed a Statement of
Expectations for Doctoral Training which lays out common principles for the
support of all Research Council students. They are aligned with the seven
principles for Innovative Doctoral Training. 
Vitae,
set up in 2008, works with the higher education sector to provide professional
and career development for researchers and build international competitiveness
through research, innovation and knowledge exchange. Vitae leads improvements
in the employability and impact of researchers, so as to ensure that
researchers are equipped to address research challenges and enhance the United
Kingdom’s economic, social and cultural capital. The Vitae programme provides
national leadership and strategic development, and works with higher education
institutions, policy-makers, stakeholders, employers and individual
researchers.
  
4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility
In
2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU
Member State was 16.2 % in UK compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference
group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates
as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 30.6 % in UK compared with 16.9
% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %. 
The
UK National Action Plan on researcher mobility and careers within the European
Research Area (ERA) (2009) points out that the United Kingdom's research base
is already one of the most open in the world, both as regards recruitment of
researchers and scientific collaborations (over 40 % of UK scientific papers
now have one or more non-UK co-authors), and the UK government funds a number
of dedicated fellowship schemes (Dorothy Hodgkin Fellowships, Newton
International Fellowships) which seek to attract the best early-career
researchers from around the world to UK institutions. Many Research Council
fellowships have a strong international element because international
collaboration is actively encouraged as part of the process of building an
international reputation. 
In
the United Kingdom, there are many examples of partnerships between
universities/research institutions and the business sector. The partnership
could range from collaboration in co-design and co-delivery of postgraduate
courses to co-funding, and joint supervision and mentoring of students. For
example, the Collaborative Awards in Science and Engineering (CASE), sponsored
by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) promote collaboration
between the research community and the end-users of research. The award allows
a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) student to spend 3-18 months with an industrial
partner in a workplace outside the academic environment. The UK Research
Councils Delivery Plan has as a national target the exchange of skills in the
research base and encouraging movement of highly skilled people between the
research base and user communities at all career stages.
5.  
GENDER
  
5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender
The
UK has a clear legal framework on equality in place. Gender equality is
enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, which provides a legislative framework to
advance equality of opportunity for all. In addition to this, the Children and
Families Act has created a system of flexible parental leave. The Athena Swan
Charter is an incentive that fosters cultural changes to advance the
representation of women in research performing organisations.   The country has
through the implementation of the Concordat to support the career development
of researchers, set out a principle that diversity and equality must be
promoted in all respects of the recruitment and career management of
researchers. The RCUK's Statement of Expectations for Equality and Diversity
places expectations on universities receiving Research Council funding. The
statement promotes and leads cultural change in relation to equalities and
diversities, to engage staff at all levels, ensure researchers are trained and
supported to address inequalities and to provide evidence of this.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 82.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than
the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research performing
organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that
within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.
Employees
in the United Kingdom have the right to return to the same job after maternity
leave on the same terms and conditions or a similar job on terms and conditions
at least as good. If the role has become redundant, employees should be offered
a suitable alternative vacancy, otherwise, they may be entitled to redundancy
pay. Cultural and institutional change is promoted by several measures.
Research Council-funded students enjoy the right to receive six months’
maternity leave on full stipend and a further six months’ unpaid maternity
leave; Research Council grants may be extended for up to 12 months to cover
periods of maternity leave. Research Council fellowships cover maternity leave
(as well as paternity leave, adoption leave, parental leave, extended jury
service or paid sick leave) for a Research Fellow in line with the terms and
conditions of the Fellow’s employment. The joint programme of the Royal Society
and the Royal Academy of Engineering is aimed at understanding and addressing
issues of diversity in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics
workforce. The country supports the L’Oréal and United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) ‘For Women in Science programme’
and co-funds the L’Oréal national fellowship programme. The Daphne Jackson
Trust offers flexible paid fellowships with mentoring and retraining that help
women and men to return to research after a career break of two or more years;
this is sponsored by the Research Councils and many universities and other
organisations. In May 2014, the United Kingdom government announced a call to
action to get educators, industry and government to commit to boosting women’s
participation in technology and engineering. In addition, a new publicity drive
led by successful British entrepreneurs will be launched in September 2014 to
change the way 14 to 16-year-olds think about science and technology, and to
encourage more to pursue it as a career.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing
organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female
researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
The
Research Councils do not, at present, explicitly ask about the gender dimension
in research content. However, peer review would consider the methodologies and
appropriate ‘users’ of the research which may include the gender dimension in
its decision making. This may explain the low values observed below at the
funders level.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of
research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research
content is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process
With
regard to gender balance in decision-making, one of the key principles of the
Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers is that diversity
and equality must be promoted in all aspects of the recruitment and careers
management of researchers. Any university or research institute that is
committed to the advancement and promotion of the careers of women in science,
engineering and technology can apply for an Athena SWAN award. Recently the
United Kingdom launched POWERful Women (PfW) – a new, professional initiative
to showcase female leadership potential in the United Kingdom’s energy sector. 
Various
research institutions run mentoring schemes that are specially tailored towards
the requirements of women in academia. In some cases, institution-wide networks
of female academics and researchers have been set up. RCUK has reported that
around 25 % of the Research Councils’ funding panel members are women.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 17.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of gender-balanced
recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing
organisations is lower than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.
The
share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research
funding organisations in the United Kingdom is lower than the EU average.
6.  
KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION
  
6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded
research
In
terms of support to open access (OA), the government, in line with its
overarching commitment to transparency and open data, is committed to ensuring
that publicly funded research outcomes should be freely accessible. The United
Kingdom's vision is for all users to be able to read published research papers
in an electronic format and to search for and re-use (including download) the
content of published research papers, both manually and using automated tools
(such as those for text and data mining), provided that any such re-use is
subject to full and proper attribution. In order to help the implementation of
the policy, the Research Councils introduced in April 2013 a new funding
mechanism: a block grant to universities and eligible research organisations to
cover the cost of article processing charges (APCs).
Related
to open access to publications, the United Kingdom is well advanced in its
implementation, notably in relation to the governement’s preference for gold
open access and acceptance of green open access with the appropriate embargo
periods. The UK has an Open Access policy for both its grants based funding
(research councils) and its institutional assessment based funding (the next
Research Excellence Framework via HEFCE).
Compliance
with the RCUK policy will be assessed as part of the first annual return that
the university have to provide RCUK as part of the evidence that will be
submitted to the independent review, who will report back in early 2015. A
recent article in ResearchFortnight presented the finding that for universities
who had received an RCUK OA Block grant and for those who did have some data,
the compliance was in the 30 to 50% bracket. The MRC has had a OA mandate since
2006, and compliance even before the introduction of the RCUK policy was around
49%. The Wellcome Trust reports a compliance of around 67% in 2013. HEFCE
funded research publications do not have a mandate for Open Access.
However,
there are currently no way of reporting how many articles issued from UK
research are available in Open Access. There is no data available for a
comprehensive analysis to be made. The report for BIS “International
comparative performance of the UK research base” (Elsevier, 2013) acknowledges
that  relevant data is not available.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of publicly funded
scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar
to that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.
Concerning
open access to data, the government has adopted the open data strategy (‘Open
data by default’) and BIS has just updated its open data strategy. The
“Research Sector Transparency Board”, chaired by the Minister, specifically
addresses how to increase access to research data. The UK is also a signatory
of the G8 Open Data Charter.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 96.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support open access to data is higher than the EU average.
Within
the ERA compliant cluster in United Kingdom, the share of research performing
organisations making scientific research data systematically available online
and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's ERA
compliant cluster.
In
addition to institutional and subject repositories, the Gateway to research
initiative provides information on Research Councils and Technology Strategy
Board funded projects and, where available, links to research outputs such as
publications.
  
6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private
sectors
In
relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and
private sectors, the Technology Strategy Board facilitates networking between
the public and private sectors. For example, the Board supports the Knowledge
Transfer Network, the Knowledge Transfer Partnerships, the nine Catapult
Centres and the Biomedical Catalyst, the Innovative Vouchers, etc. Scotland
launched in October 2013 the Single Knowledge Exchange Organisation (SKEO)
under the banner ‘Innovation Scotland’. It continued supporting Interface, the
free, national service which match-makes businesses with research resources in
Scotland’s universities and research centres supporting the establishment of a
number of Innovation Centres where businesses and universities can work together
to drive innovation in and across Scotland’s key sectors (NRP 2014). 
The
UK’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is responsible for the intellectual
property (IP) framework in the United Kingdom for patents, trademarks, designs
and copyright. An effective and fair IP framework is essential to support the
translation of the results of research into innovative products, processes and
services. In addition, the Lambert toolkit for IP offers guidelines for
universities and companies that wish to undertake collaborative research
projects. 
The
National Centre for Universities and Business (NCUB) replaced the Council for
Industry and Higher Education in 2013. It develops, promotes and supports
world-class collaboration between universities and business across the United
Kingdom. Research Councils operate Cooperative Awards for Science and
Engineering which promote jointly supervised studentships between academic and
private or other public sector actors. The UK Research Partnership Investment
Fund is designed to support investment in higher education research facilities.
The fund was originally set up in 2012. It is dedicated to supporting
large-scale capital projects from HEIs with significant track records of
research excellence, provided that they secure co-investment from businesses,
charities or endowments (individual philanthropy). Northern Ireland has been
developing Competence Centres. Scotland has launched the new framework for
entrepreneurship and innovation in November 2013 called Scotland Can Do (NRP 2014).
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
The
share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and
support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU
average.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research
performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is
lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of
research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge
transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of
research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge
transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research
personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time
equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital
research services
In
relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the United Kingdom has set up a
strategy for its implementation, the Strategic Vision for UK e-Infrastructure,
and allocated  GBP 165 million in 2011, supported by an additional GBP 189
million in 2012 to strengthen the United Kingdom’s e-infrastructure in
collaboration with industry. The country has implemented a research and
education network, essential for making digital services possible. The UK
National Research and Education Network, Janet, is a specialised Internet
service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and
education communities within the country. The UK government has set up the
E-infrastructure Leadership Council (ELC) to advise on all aspects of
e-infrastructure, including networks, data stores, computers, software and
skills.
Concerning
digital services, RCUK is developing its own complementary integrated set of
priorities for e-infrastructure for research, and will work closely with the
ELC to ensure linkage. Six areas are being tackled: Computer systems, software,
data, skills, authentication and security, and networks.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in United Kingdom, the share of research-performing
organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a
research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU
ERA-compliant cluster.
  
6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities
The
United Kingdom is a member of eduGAIN, which it joined in May 2013. Jisc,
representing UK universities, has launched the UK Access Management Federation
for Education and Research, which provides a single solution to accessing
online resources and services for education and research. RCUK is exploring the
implications of electronic identity for researchers and is actively planning
how to integrate the Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) with
the RCUK grant systems.
 Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
 Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014 
Within
the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of
research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for
their researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.
7.  
NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS
  
7.1.   Comments
A
total of 44 research performing organisations in United Kingdom answered the
2014 ERA survey, which represents 4.4% of the total number of researchers in
the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).
The
principal component and clustering analysis of research performing
organisations in United Kingdom shows that 51.3 % of them are in the ‘ERA
compliant’ cluster, 35.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’
cluster and 12.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’
cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of
researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the
shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 91.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster,
7.1 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.0 % for those organisations
where ERA principles are not applicable.
However,
the results should be considered with caution, as a limited number of research
performing organisations provided answers to the ERA survey, which did not
include several important research performing organisations (large numbers of
major universities and Research Council institutes) did not participate in the
survey.
The
relatively low results in terms of 'Share of research performing organisations
which include the gender dimension in research content' in comparison with the
EU average could reflect the fact that it is/may be taken into consideration in
the design of the projects or as part of the peer review process and not as
part of the organisation’s policy. Almost half of the respondents (notably
directors and research managers) indicated that they do not know whether their
programmes included the gender dimension or that it is not applicable to their
cases.
The
low 'share of publicly funded scientific publication in Open Access amongst
research performing organisations' is possibly due to the absence of major
research performing organisations among the respondents to the survey. 
The
low figures estimated for the indicators 'Share of funders which can base their
project based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews
carried out by non-national institutions' and 'Share of project based research
and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by
institutions outside the country' are explained by the fact that UKRC act as
lead agencies and thus agencies in some other Member States use the results of
the evaluations carried out by UKRC due to their quality and performance.
It
should also be noted though that several important national funders and
charities did not participate in the survey. Results presented for indicators
reflecting the implementation of ERA by funders represent 27 % of total GBAORD
in the UK.
Policy
measures in support of ERA implementation
 Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013 
 Research and innovation system 
 New strategy for research and innovation || 2014 || X || X 
 Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review 
 Research Councils grants and support ||   ||   ||   
 UK Higher Education Funding Bodies Research Councils ||   ||   ||   
 Institutional funding based on institutional assessment 
 Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth || 2011 ||   ||   
 UK Higher Education Funding Bodies ||   ||   ||   
 Implementing joint research agendas 
 Joint Programming Initiatives || 2008 ||   ||   
 ERA-nets ||   ||   ||   
 Open Research Area in Europe for the Social Sciences (ORA) || 2009 ||   ||   
 Several bi-lateral science and technology agreements with third countries ||   ||   ||   
 Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 
 Money follows Researcher scheme ||   ||   ||   
 Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 Extension of the Research Partnership Investment Fund || 2013 || X || X 
 Investing for Growth: Capital Infrastructure for the 21st Century || 2012 || X ||   
 Research Partnerships Investment Fund 2012-2015 || 2012 || X ||   
 Budget 2013 || 2013 || X || X 
 Large Facilities Capital Fund || 2002 ||   ||   
 RCUK Strategic Framework for Capital Investment || 2012 || X ||   
 Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest 
 UK research infrastructures ||   ||   ||   
 Attractive careers 
 The Concordat to Support the Career development of Researchers || 2008 ||   ||   
 EURAXESS-UK || 2011 ||   ||   
 Terms and Conditions of Research Council Training Grants ||   ||   ||   
 Private pension agreements for researchers ||   ||   ||   
 Tier 5 (Temporary worker - government authorised exchange) || 2013 || X || X 
 Foster cultural and institutional change on gender 
 Athena Swan Charter || 2005 ||   ||   
 Gender balance in the decision-making process 
 Royal Society and Royal Academy of engineering joint programme to tackle diversity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) National academies and their academic fellowships RCUK PhD and fellowship awards STEMNET and STEM Ambassadors ||   ||   ||   
 RCUK Statement of Expectations for Equality and Diversity || 2013 || X || X 
 Equality Act 2010 || 2010 ||   ||   
 Children and Families Bill || 2013 || X || X 
 Public Sector Equality Duty ||   ||   ||   
 Research Excellence Framework Equality and Diversity Panel || 2010 ||   ||   
 Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research 
 RCUK Policy on Open Access || 2013 || X || X 
 National Reform Programme || 2013 || X || X 
 Gateway to Research || 2012 || X ||   
 Research Councils Repositories ||   ||   ||   
             UK Open Data Policy || 2012 || X ||   
 BIS Open Data Policy || 2014 || X || X 
 Research Sector Transparency Board || 2013 || X || X 
             HEFCE Open Access Policy || 2013 || X || X 
 Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors 
 UK Intellectual Property Office initiative ||   ||   ||   
 National Centre for Universities and Business (NCUB) || 2013 || X || X 
 Higher Education Innovation Fund UK Research Partnership Investment Fund National Centre for Universities and Business ||   ||   ||   
 Smart Cymru: R&D and innovation grant support to business || 2012 || X ||   
 Catapult Centres || 2011 ||   ||   
 Cooperative Awards for Science and Engineering (CASE) || 1994 ||   ||   
 Knowledge Transfer Partnerships || 1975 ||   ||   
 Knowledge Transfer Networks || 2004 ||   ||   
 Technology Strategy Board Concept to Commercialisation || 2011 ||   ||   
 TSB/Research Council Catalyst Funds || 2011 ||   ||   
 Collaborative R&D || 2011 ||   ||   
 Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services 
 E-infrastructure Leadership Council || 2012 || X ||   
 UK e-Science Programme || 2002 ||   ||   
 Uptake of federated electronic identities 
 Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) || 2012 || X ||   
 eduGAIN ||   ||   ||   
Iceland 
Priority: More effective national
systems

 Research and Innovation structure

The
main legal framework for the research and innovation system in Iceland is found
in acts no. 2/2003 on the Science and Technology Policy Council, no. 3/2003 on
Government Support for Scientific Research and no. 75/2007 on Government
Support for Technology, Research and Industry Development. 
The
Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC), headed by the prime minister, is
the body in charge of R&D policy at a strategic level. The STPC currently
includes six of the government nine ministers as well as representatives
appointed by the ministries, higher education institutions and industry and labour
organizations. Two working committees, the Science Committee and the Technology
Committee operate under the STPC and its secretariat is divided between the Ministry
of Education, Science and Culture and the Ministry of Industries and
Innovation. The role of the STPC is to define the strategic orientations for
STI development policy in Iceland. The primary instruments for supporting the
policy are the three main competitive funds: the Research Fund, the Technology
Development Fund and the Infrastructure Fund. 
Two
institutions are central in providing service and support to the research and
innovation community in Iceland: The Icelandic Centre for Research (Rannís) and
Innovation Center Iceland. Rannís reports to the Ministry of Education, Science
and Culture. Rannís provides support to the research and innovation community.
It administers competitive funds and strategic research programmes, coordinates
and promotes Icelandic participation in collaborative international projects in
science and technology, monitors resources and performance in R&D and
promotes public awareness of research and innovation in Iceland. The Innovation
Center Iceland, which operates under the auspices of the Mininstry of
Industries and Innovation, encourages innovation and promotes the advancement
of new ideas in the Icelandic economy by providing active participation and
support to entrepreneurs and businesses. It acts as an intermediary between
individual entrepreneurs, companies and public agencies and operates an
incubation center. 

 National strategy for Research and
     Innovation

The
national STI policy is developed by the STPC. The ministries, which are largely
independent and autonomous, are responsible for operationalizing the policy.
The current policy (2014-2016) was adopted in November 2013 and has been
followed up with an Action Plan (http://www.forsaetisraduneyti.is/vt/). The
focus of the policy is fourfold: to increase recruitment in research and
innovation; to strengthen collaboration between higher education institutions,
research institutions and companies; to increase funding and investment in
research and innovation; and to strengthen the evaluation of the quality and
impact of research and innovation. Furthermore, the Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture is currently preparing a new roadmap for research infrastructures.

 Research and Innovation funding

In
recent years, competitive funds have accounted for between 15 per cent and 20
per cent of the total public investment in research and innovation. One of the
aims of the STPC Policy Action Plan is to increase the proportion of
competitive funding in the system to 27 per cent of the total public funding by
2016. 
The
four main public competitive funds in Iceland are the Icelandic Research Fund,
the Infrastructure Fund, the Strategic Research Programme, and the Technology
Development Fund.[1]
Several smaller public funds exist, some of which are directed at specific
industries, such as the Added Value for Seafood Research Programme Fund (AVS)
and the Fisheries’ Project Fund (see Table 1). 
In
the years following the economic collapse (2009-2011), contributions to the
Technology Development Fund decreased somewhat while the Research Fund remained
relatively stable. In 2013 both funds were increased considerably. In 2014 they
decreased from the 2013 level, but remain well above their 2012 level in both
real and nominal value. 
The
Strategic Research Programme was established over a decade ago with the aim of
stimulating research and development in strategically chosen areas. The scheme
was seen as supplementary to the two other funds that are open. The fund has
been one of the most important schemes in promoting collaboration between
companies, research institutes and higher education institutes. 
Table
1: Public investment in competitive funds 2009-2014. MISK, real value.* 
   || 2009 || 2010 || 2011 || 2012 || 2013 || 2014** 
 The Technology Development Fund || 807 || 1.037 || 782 || 830 || 1,309 || 983 
 The Research Fund || 983 || 982 || 907 || 819 || 1,351 || 1,185 
 The Graduate Student Fund*** || 120 || 115 || 103 || 103 || 98 || - 
 The Strategic Research Programme for Science and Technology || 394 || 491 || 267 || 208 || 406 || 193 
 The Infrastructure Fund || 405 || 184 || 174 || 225 || 110 || 106 
 Total, main competitive funds || 2,709 || 2,809 || 2,233 || 2,185 || 3,274 || 2,467 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Research Fund for Increased Value in Fisheries || 414 || 249 || 449 || 304 || 257 || 164 
 Other research and development funds || 182 || 172 || 687 || 675 || 210 || 100 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Tax reduction scheme**** ||   ||   || 614 || 818 || 1,139 || 1,084 
 Total || 3,184 || 3,114 || 3,879 || 3,879 || 4,781 || 3,814 
Source:
Rannís.
*Original
sources: Government accounts for 2009-2012, the national budget for 2014.
**
The 2014 prices are based on prices in the 2014 draft budget.
***
The Research Fund for Graduate Students was merged with the Research Fund in
2013. 
****Established
in 2009. Refunding first took place in 2011.
A
tax reduction scheme came into effect in 2011, which enabled companies to
receive a refund of up to 20 per cent of R&D costs. Public contribution to
the scheme has increased considerably since its implementation (Table 1). The
STPC policy calls for a considerable increase in private investments in R&D
in 2015-2016. If Iceland is to achieve the new policy’s goal of reaching 3 per
cent in R&D expenditure by 2016,[2]
it has been estimated that the required additional investment in 2015 and 2016
amounts to approximately 8 billion ISK. Of this amount 2.8 billion ISK represents
an increase to the public funds. The rest is foreseen to come from private
companies.

 Institutional funding based on
     institutional assessment

Over
80 per cent of the public contribution to R&D is in the form of block
grants allocated directly to institutions. The Ministry of Education, Science
and Culture has signed five year contracts (2012-2016) with all universities in
Iceland (public and private). The contracts, which include performance
indicators, are reviewed and monitored annually. The ministry has also signed
three years contracts with knowledge centres and performance contracts with two
research institutions. 
Priority: Transnational Cooperation
International
cooperation is vital for the development of research and innovation in Iceland.
Iceland has been participating in European programmes in the fields of
education and research since 1994. 

 Implement joint research agendas
  Framework Programme

Currently
Iceland is participating in the JPI on healthy and productive seas and oceans.
Iceland is also an active partner in nine ERA-NETs (M-Era, Neuron II, Era
SysApp, EuroNanoMed II, HERA, NORFACE, SEAS-ERA, Era Marine BioTech, Era
Geothermal, Cofasp).
Iceland
participates in a number of ERA-Net projects some of which have the objective
of becoming established Article 185 initiatives in the future. Eurostars has
been running as an Article 185 initiative since 2008, with Icelandic
participation from the start. Iceland has not had an official policy towards
participation in Article 187 initiatives. However, Icelandic organisations
participate in Innovative Medicines and Hydrogen and Fuel Cells initiatives.
Iceland is a member of EUREKA, COST and ESPON.

  Other joint research agendas

Iceland
is part of the NORIA, the Nordic Research and Innovation Area, which is
responsible for the Nordic R&D cooperation in the fields of research and
innovation. This involves Nordic research funding institutions, fixed-term research
programmes, Nordic Centres of Excellence, the Top-level Research Initiative
(the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative to involve the
very best agencies and institutions in the Nordic region, and promote research
and innovation), grant schemes, and the coordination and planning of major
infrastructure investments among the Nordic countries.
A
strategic document on Iceland’s participation in joint programming initiatives
and other international programs is still to be developed. 

 Openness of Member State/Associated
     Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation 

For
a small country like Iceland, international cooperation is extremely important
and many international researchers collaborate extensively with researchers
overseas. Iceland has signed a number of bilateral agreements with third
countries such as the US, China and India. 
Common
funding principles to make national research programmes compatible,
interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers.
According
to the STPC Policy Action Plan, the regulations for funding, including
definitions of eligible costs, are to be changed in order to coordinate with
international regulations, in particular Horizon 2020.

 Interoperability,
     mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 

Iceland
participates in joint programming initiatives where there is mutual peer review
recognition. Furthermore, the board of the Technology Development Fund may, in
some cases, recognize international peer-review as a part of its procedures.
However, due to legal restrictions, the Research Fund does not accept
international peer-review. The STPC Policy Action Plans aim to revise the legal
framework of the Research Fund and address the issue of recognizing
international peer-review in that process. 
Priority: Research Infrastructures

 Financial commitments for the
     construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research
     infrastructures of pan-European interest

Iceland
has participated in the preparatory phases of several ESFRI infrastructures.
Iceland does not currently have a national strategy on financial commitments in
ESFRI, but a new Roadmap is expected in 2015. 
Priority: Open labour markets for
researchers

 Open, transparent and merit based
     recruitment of researchers

According
to the legal framework for higher education institutions (act. 63/2006), the
recruitment and selection of researchers in HEIs should be transparent and
merit based. Apart from these general principles, the boards of the higher
education institutions have autonomy to set recruitment strategies for their
institutions. The largest university, the University of Iceland has recently
experimented with advertising for open positions, where the aim is to recruit
excellent researchers in any field rather than specifying the field or the
research area. The method has proven to be successful for attracting high-level
international researchers to the University. 
There
are no formal barriers to recruiting non-nationals for permanent research and
academic positions. On EURAXESS Iceland, foreign researchers can access
information on vacant positions in Icelandic universities and research
institutions as well as companies. All Icelandic universities have signed the
European charter for researchers and the code of conducts for their
recruitment. 
The
STPC Policy Action Plan includes actions to encourage the rapid handling of
work permit applications for researchers outside the EU in order to facilitate
international recruitment in private companies and universities in Iceland.

 Researchers careers

There
is a strong tradition in Iceland for seeking doctoral education overseas.
However, in recent years, the possibilities of pursuing doctoral training within
Icelandic institutions have increased. Three universities are accredited to award
doctoral degrees: the University of Iceland, the Agricultural University (in
collaboration with the University of Iceland) and the University of Reykjavík.
Of these, the University of Iceland is by far the largest. In the years
2000-2003 there were on average six doctoral graduates per year from the
University of Iceland, but in the past four years (2010-2013) this number has
increased to 44 PhDs per year on average. 
The
aim of the STPC Policy Action Plan is the continued development of doctoral
training in Iceland. The Plan’s aim is that by 2016, 200 doctoral students will
be fully funded in Iceland. This is to be achieved through a increase in
competitive funding. Moreover, a Strategic Research Programme specifically
aimed at strengthening the recruitment of young researchers, is to be launched
in 2015. Furthermore, the Action Plan includes actions to increase the
participation of private companies in doctoral training. 
One
of the challenges in Iceland has been to offer an attractive research environment
to early career researchers. The University of Iceland is currently addressing
this issue by increasing the number of post-doc positions at the institution. 

 Cross-border access to and
     portability of national grants

The
legal framework of the Research Fund prohibits cross-border funding flows.
However, in order to increase Iceland’s participation in international
programs, the STPC Policy Action Plan includes a re-examination of the law as
one of its actions. The other large competitive fund, the Technology
Development Fund, has not dealt with the same restrictions as the Research Fund
and has thus been able to fund researchers outside Iceland. 

 Support structured innovative
     doctoral training programmes

The
STPC Policy Action Plan aims to increase research collaboration between higher
education institutions, research institutions and private companies, including
collaboration on doctoral training. As a part of this a Strategic Research
Programme on recruitment to research and innovation will be launched in 2015.
The Research Programme will aim to increase graduates in natural science and
technology, but Iceland is currently below the EU average in tertiary education
graduates in these fields. 
Priority: Gender balance and gender
contents in research
Iceland
has had a special statute intended to ensure equality between women and men and
their equal status in all respects since 1976. The current Gender Equality Act
dates from 2008.[3] There
are no specific acts regulating gender equality in public research. However, in
some cases individual higher education institutions have formed strategies
specifically aimed at promoting equal rights in research. 

 Foster cultural and institutional
     change on gender
  National policies on gender
      equality in public research

The
Gender Equality Act stipulates that all enterprises and institutions with more
than 25 employees, on average over the year, shall set themselves a gender
equality programme or mainstream gender equality perspectives into their
personnel policy. This applies to research performing organizations and higher
education institutions. These gender equality programmes and gender equality
perspectives in personnel policies shall be reviewed at three-year intervals.
According
to a recent report on gender equality in higher education in Iceland[4]  the current status of addressing gender
issues is different in the seven higher education institutions in Iceland. Many
positive developments have taken place in recent years and all HEIs have gender
equality plans for students and staff. Moreover, almost all HEIs have an
equality board or council which supervises the gender equality action plan. In
addition most HEIs have a gender equality officer. The HEIs in Iceland have
similar concerns when it comes to gender equality in higher education:
·        
gender balance in certain study areas, 
·        
high drop-out rates of male students, 
·        
future prospects of female graduates, 
·        
lack of time for gender equality work,
·        
lack of time to execute the gender
action plans,
·        
increase cooperation between universities
needed, and
·        
to have a broader definition of gender
equality. 
The
Centre for Women´s and Gender Studies (RIKK) was founded at the University of
Iceland in 1991. It has been instrumental in coordinating and organizing
women's studies in Iceland. The Centre supports women´s studies at academic
level, publishes research on gender issues, orchestrates a lecture series and
seminars during the academic year and provides an information service. The
centre co-ordinates research projects on various subjects in the fields of
sociology, gender research, anthropology etc. It participates in several Nordic
and European projects and is now taking part in running several national
projects. The centre also oversees Edda – Center for Excellence established in
2009 and GEST – The Gender Equality Studies and Training Programme. 
The
University of Iceland has offered Gender Studies programme since 1996, for
undergraduate, graduate and PhD students. The programme is now part of the
Faculty of Political Science, but in addition many courses are available in
other faculties. The programme focuses on providing students with broad and
multidisciplinary perspectives. In addition the objective is to provide
critical knowledge and expertise in the practical implementation of gender
equality principles. 

  Careers – Working conditions
      in public research

In
2012 the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture took part in a Nordic
project on gender balance in academia. The aim of the project was to compare
the developments in gender equality legislation, statistics and policy in the
Nordic countries and find good examples of successful instruments and measures
that have improved the gender balance in academia in these countries.[5] 

 Gender balance in decision making
     process

The
current Gender Equality Act aims to establish and maintain equal status and
equal opportunities for women and men, and thus promote gender equality in all
spheres of society. It introduces a minimum quota of 40 per cent women in
governmental (state and municipal) committees and councils, if the body
consists of more than three members and gender mainstreaming is
institutionalized.
Since
2008 the Centre for Gender Equality has been working on a project called Side
by Side, a gender-mainstreaming project funded by the EU Progress Programme.
The aim of the project is to implement and develop gender mainstreaming in
national policies and activities in Iceland.
Furthermore,
since 2009 there has been a focus on gender responsive budgeting in Iceland and
this is reflected in a recent parliamentary resolution on a four year gender
equality action programme 2011-2014. Funds and public support for scientific
research should include provisions to systematically collect information on the
gender composition of expert councils, applicants and grantees, and grant
amounts. If an uneven distribution is found between the grantees of either
gender they should examine whether action should be taken to correct this
inequality, for example, by making grant applications more accessible, or
reviewing the allocation rules.
Other
recent and current activities in this area include:
·        
a study on gender balance in all
research and innovation funds,
·        
a study on gender balance in
universities, and
·        
a feasibility study on implementing a
gender equality prize for universities. 
Priority: Knowledge circulation

 Open access for publications and
     data resulting from publicly funded research

According
to Act no. 3/2003 with later amendments regarding public funding of scientific
research, the results of research funded by the public funds should be
published in open access fora unless otherwise agreed. All grantees of the
competitive funds administered by Rannís are encouraged to publish in open
access journals. 
The
STPC Policy Action Plan aims at establishing a working group on research
infrastructures in 2014. One of the tasks of the working group is to address
the question of open access to data gathered through regular monitoring and
research in public research institutions. 

 Open innovation (OI) and knowledge
     transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

Knowledge
transfer is actively being promoted by the Research Liaison Office of the
University of Iceland.
Since
2009, the Strategic Research Programme for Centres of Excellence and Research
Clusters (Markáætlun um öndvegissetur og klasa) has emphasized the
collaboration of higher education institutions, public research institutes and
businesses. Currently there are a small number of cooperation fora within certain
research fields, driven by this program, focusing on geothermal energy,
artificial intelligence, and studies in equality and diversity. 

 Policies for public
     e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

There
are open repositories maintained by Landspitali University Hospital and the
National and University library, and a national synchronized repository (CRIS
based on CERIF) is being planned in 2013/14.
Iceland
has developed the Iceland Consortia (IC) for electronic subscriptions, hosted
by the National and University library. The aim of the IC is to secure access
to academic and scholarly content for students and staff of academic and
research institutions and the general public in Iceland. Current licenses
include e-journals, databases, citations databases and encyclopaedias. It
serves academics and research institutions as well as every computer in the
country that is connected to the Internet through an Icelandic Internet Service
Provider (ISP).
Montenegro 
Priority: More effective national
systems 

 Research and Innovation structure

The
Ministry of Science (MoS), which was created in December 2010 (previously
organized as a department within Ministry of Education), as the main public
administrative body implementing research and development policy (through
national and international programmes of public interest), negotiates and
implements bilateral scientific and technology (S&T) cooperation
agreements, concludes memorandums, protocols and programmes of collaboration
with ministries and foreign organizations. CSRA prepares and proposes R&D
strategies to the Government, monitors implementation of the strategies, gives
expert proposals and has an advisory role.
The
research community is made of 46 licensed scientific research institutions, out
of which 32 faculties (public and private), eight institutes (public and
private) and six other scientific research institutions. 2,303 professionals
are employed in the R&D sector3, which accounts for 0.8% of the total
labour force.

 National
     strategy for Research and Innovation

Montenegro
published a Strategy for science and research (Strategija
naučno-istraživačke djelatnosti Crne Gore (2008-2016), which covers
an eight year period and describes the strategic importance of science and
research for the economic and social development of Montenegro. The strategy
covers areas of research, innovation and technological development, as well as
international cooperation. 

 Competitive
     funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of
     international peer review
  Project-based
      funding in the country

Competitive
funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of
international peer review is implemented for the national scientific research
projects for the cycle 2012-2015. The call was open for the licensed scientific
research institutions in Montenegro; 198 proposals were submitted and have been
evaluated by thematic panels of independent international experts (two evaluators
per project). The evaluations involved 420 international independent experts.
The success rate was 52,50%. After the first research year, all research teams
submitted their reports on the implementation as well as the research plan for
the second year. 
One
of the initiatives that provide research grants on a project basis is the
Higher Education and Research for Innovation and Competitiveness Project –
HERIC. The objective of HERIC is to strengthen the quality and relevance of
higher education and research in Montenegro through reforming the higher
education finance and quality assurance systems and by strengthening research
and development capabilities. The Ministry of Science, within the HERIC
initiative has realized activities on the establishment of the first Centre of
Excellence and large collaborative research grants, both through the calls for
proposals applying the core principles of international peer review. 
The
Ministry of Science published the call for the establishment of the first Centre
of Excellence in Montenegro, on May 30th 2013. A total of 10
research institutions applied. At the end of December 2013, a two-stage
application evaluation process, conducted by foreign experts, was completed.
Each application that met eligibility, administrative and environmental
compliance criteria was remotely evaluated by two independent and unbiased
International Scientific Peer Reviewers (ISPRs). The individual evaluation
reports, prepared by the ISPRs, was examined and discussed by the Final Evaluation
Committee composed of three unbiased International Project Implementation
Experts (IPIEs) responsible for carrying out the final evaluation. 
On
May 20th 2014, the Ministry of Science published the second call for
research grants with the deadline for submission on September 19th
2014. The same process of evaluation, as for the first call for research
grants, will be applied.

 Institutional funding based on
     institutional assessment

Through
the HERIC project, the Study on Research Equipment and Creation of Joint
Research Area that presents the state of available equipment in 29 licensed
research institutions in Montenegro, both public and private, was completed in
November 2013. The licensed research institutions were selected based on
priority research fields in which the Centre of Excellence and large research
grants will be funded, but also according to the capacities of institutions.
The Study on Scientific Equipment and Creation of Joint Research Area presents
an overview of the existing equipment in research institutions, highlighting
the necessity to purchase new equipment that would be used jointly by several
institutions from the same field of research.
The
study was taken into consideration during the process of determining which
equipment should be financed, both for the Centre of Excellence and large
collaborative research grants. 
Priority: Transnational Cooperation

 Implement joint research agendas
  Joint research

Participation
in research programmes
Montenegro
participated in the Framework Programmes of the European Community (FP5, FP6
and first year of the FP7 programme) as a third country.
Based
on the Memorandum of Understanding, as of January 25th, 2008,
Montenegro participated as an associated country to the FP7 Programme. A
network of National Contact Points (NCP) was established and coordinated by the
Ministry of Science. In addition to this network, administrative capacity
included the appointed members of Programme Committees, altogether composing
the structure that provided support in disseminating information, searching for
adequate partners, preparing and proposing projects for FP7.
Montenegro
participated in 34 projects under the FP7 Programme, with a success rate of
19.48%.

  FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Participation
in new Research and Innovation Framework Programme - Horizon 2020 (2014–2020)
Taking
into account the positive experience gained through participation in the EU
Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and
Demonstration Activities - FP7, and according to the strategic goal of the
Ministry of Science to provide continuity in supporting the scientific research
community in Montenegro at international level, the Ministry of Science
expressed its interest for Montenegro’s association to the new EU Framework
Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 (2014-2020), in January
2013.
On
July 30th 2013, the Ministry of Science established the network of
National Contact Points (NCP) for Horizon 2020, in accordance with the
"Minimum standards and guiding principles", and appointed the members
of Montenegro in the Programme Committees for Horizon 2020, on February 25th
2014, consisting of the representatives from the Ministry of Science, as well
as from the academic community and the business sector. The appointed NCPs,
participated in programme training in 2013/2014.
The
Government of Montenegro, on May 29th 2014, adopted the International Agreement
between the European Union and Montenegro on the
participation of Montenegro in the Union programme Horizon 2020 - the Framework
Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020). Montenegro joined the EU Framework Programme for Research and
Innovation – Horizon 2020 on July 01st 2014. 
Participation
in the Seventh Euratom Framework Programme
Montenegro has not participated in projects concerning nuclear
research area within the EURATOM Framework Programme FP7. In the forthcoming
period, consultations will be held with the scientific research community in
order to define priorities and future activities within the FP7 EURATOM. This
is done in consideration of Montenegro’s declaration as a non-nuclear country,
its available research and financial capacities, and programmes successfully
implemented thus far in the framework of cooperation between Montenegro and the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Montenegro is a member of the IAEA
since 2006.
On
June 19th 2014, the Government of Montenegro adopted the
Country Programme Framework (CPF) on cooperation between Montenegro and the
International Atomic Energy Agency, 2014-2020.
In
2013, Montenegro initiated cooperation with the Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications
in order to provide opportunities to the Montenegrin scientific-research
community to use the Department's programmes and projects.
Montenegro’s
involvement in the IAEA in 2006 resulted in 10 national projects and further
participation in 76 regional projects.
Since
2012, Montenegro completed four national projects, 43 regional projects and one
interregional project.
For
the project cycle 2016-2017, three national projects were submitted to IAEA. 
                                                             
i.     
Joint programming initiatives
Montenegro recognized the importance of preparing
for participation in joint programming initiatives in research. 
Firstly, the Ministry of Science realized the Joint
Call for co-financing national scientific research projects (2012-2015) of
basic, applied and development research, which are in line with the Strategy
for Scientific Research Activities and 10 priority areas in research. 
Montenegro participated in the SEE-ERA.NET project
to network research institutions in 14 Western Balkans countries and EU Member
States, which was successfully funded under the FP6 programme. Research teams
from Montenegro participated in six out of the 34 projects which were
implemented in the period from 2007 to 2009. Research teams from Montenegro
participated in six projects across the following thematic areas: Food,
Agriculture and Biotechnology, Information and Communication Technologies and Environment
including Climate Change. 
The SEE-ERA.NET PLUS project was also implemented
under the 7thFP, and research teams from Montenegro participated in
three projects across the following thematic areas: AgroFood and Information
and Communication Technologies, from 2010 to 2012.

  Other joint research agendas

Montenegro
participated in three SEE-ERA.NET Plus networks, namely South East Europe
ERA-NET from 2004-2009, South East European Research Area for e-Infrastructures
in the period of 2009-2012, and lastly South East European ERA-NET Plus: Joint
call for European Research projects in September 2009 in order to enhance the integration
of the Western Balkan Countries into the European Research Area, which lasted
from 2009 to 2013. 

 Openness of Member State/Associated
     Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation 

International
cooperation in science and research is realized through various programmes for
science and research funding. 
Montenegro
has developed wide multilateral cooperation in the
areas of science and technology by participating in the following programmes
and organizations: EUREKA, European Cooperation in Science and Technology
(COST), NATO “Science for Peace and Security Programme”, and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Montenegro
is a member of the EUREKA programme since 22nd June 2012, when the
Memorandum was signed, and participates in three projects. These are:
·        
ELDORO (Electronic Doctor’s Round) –
improvement of the flow of information in hospitals and clinics through the use
of modern communication technologies of the Company MG Soft (total amount: EUR 3,58 million)  
·        
WINEREST (Sustainable and innovative use
of waste from grape and fruit processing) – finding technology and introducing
into production the economically viable and environmentally safe use of waste
from the process of producing wine and fruit juices, Company “13. jul Plantaže”
(total amount:
EUR 0,6 million) 
·        
LEADOC - (Longterm Archiving of Electronic Documents in the
Cloud) - the project addresses the security and validity of electronic
documents from the prospective of long term archiving using cloud computing.
Special attention is given to safe and secure mobile access to the documents
archived in trusted electronic cloud storage (total amount: EUR 1,33 million). 
From 2012, Montenegrin institutions are implementing the
following projects: 
·        
Improvements in the
Harmonized Seismic Hazard Maps for the Western Balkan Countries,
2012/15.
·        
Increasing the
clearance capacity for unexploded ordnance in Montenegro, 2014/17.
Since gaining independence in May 2006, the Government of Montenegro
concluded agreements on scientific and technological cooperation with 13
countries. 
Bilateral S&T cooperation is based on agreements and realized
through joint calls for co-financing scientific and technological cooperation.
In the last two years Montenegro signed the following agreements on scientific
and technological cooperation:
·        
Agreement on Scientific and
Technological Cooperation with Hungary, on September 25th, 2012, in
Podgorica;
·        
Agreement between Montenegro and the
Republic of Poland on Culture, Education and Science was signed on October
26th, 2012, in Warsaw, Poland.
·        
Agreement on Scientific and
Technological Cooperation with the Republic of Turkey and Protocol on
Cooperation between the Ministry of Science and TÜBİTAK, on April 12th,
2013, in Ankara; 
·        
Agreement between the Ministry of Science
and National Research Council (CNR) of the Republic of Italy, followed by the
Programme of  scientific cooperation, on July 04th, 2013, in
Podgorica; and
·        
Agreement on Scientific and
Technological Cooperation with the Republic of Italy, on September 26th,
2013, in Podgorica.
Cross
border cooperation is strengthened trough pre-accession IPA II funds. 
With
a view to encouraging more intensive scientific and technological cooperation,
Montenegro will make efforts to strengthen its institutional, administrative
and financial capacities in the forthcoming period, through the EC’s technical
assistance programmes, cooperation with the EU member states and use of
pre-accession funds. 
Strengthening
international co-operation in RDI is of great importance for fulfilling the
following goals: integration of the Montenegrin research community in ERA and
ensuring its greater participation in the programmes of the European Union and
other international programmes.
Common
funding principles to make national research programmes compatible,
interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers
National scientific
research projects are          implemented through public calls open to
licensed scientific research institutions. Definition of priorities in the
calls and eligibility criteria are set by the Ministry of Science, based
on a suggestion from the Council for Scientific Research Activities, and with
prior stakeholder consultation. The call for national scientific research
projects for the project cycle 2012-2015 was open for licensed scientific
research institutions (as a lead applicant). The chosen institution conducts
research in 10 priority research areas, which are in line with the EU
priorities. In this way, international researchers can be involved in research
activities in Montenegro. One of the main evaluation criteria for national projects was
multilateral networking and regional linking, while for the Centre of
Excellence and large research grants international cooperation was the
obligatory criterion. Therefore, the international researchers are engaged in
85 national projects for the cycle 2012-2015 and in all research grants, as
well as in the Centre of Excellence. Also, through bilateral projects, COST
Actions and the EUREKA programme, the Ministry supports projects that
Montenegrin researchers conduct with the international partners.
Priority: Research Infrastructures

 Financial commitments for the
     construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research
     infrastructures of pan-European interest
  Participation in the
      development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the
      ESFRI Roadmap

The
main objective of the Roadmap infrastructure is to define and present the
priorities of Montenegro in the field of research infrastructures. With its
content, the Roadmap will be complementary to the Strategy for Scientific
Research Activities of Montenegro for the period 2012-2016, and will represent
the implementation document in this area. The roadmap should serve as the basis
for governmental bodies and infrastructure. One of its important functions is
to provide a comprehensive overview of the current and planned activities at
the state level, especially those related to the field of research
infrastructure, their synergy and effective distribution of available funds.
The document provides a certain level of predictability and understanding of
state plans as well as monitoring the implementation of public policies and
objectives in the field of research infrastructures. The document is not
legally binding, and the dynamic and scope of implementing goals will vary from
year to year and depend on the availability of funds in the state budget and
the overall condition of the financial sector.
The abovementioned methodology includes:
·          
The number of potential researchers in a
particular field and the possibility of hiring new researchers; 
·          
The impact on the economy, particularly
the benefits of potential participation of Montenegrin companies in developing
research infrastructure, the impact on the industry and the potential to create
spin-off companies; 
·          
The importance of knowledge development
in Montenegro, development of interdisciplinary research, and possibility of
the use of modern equipment; 
·          
The importance for society (improvement
of living conditions, social challenges, promotion of science and development
of scientific talents...);  and
·          
The financial aspect ratio that includes
investment and realized benefits.
The
RI roadmap was prepared and sent for review to the licensed scientific research
institutions in Montenegro. It should be completed by the end of September and
presented at the next ESFRI meeting.
Priority: Open labour markets for
researchers

 Open, transparent and merit based
     recruitment of researchers

Montenegro
is constantly developing its mobility opportunities which would give the chance
for Montenegrin researchers to work in research centres and institutes abroad,
as well as invite foreign researchers to work in Montenegrin scientific
research institutions. In this way, Montenegrin and foreign researchers are
able to conduct joint research through the use of technology and modern
laboratories, sharing knowledge and experience through joint scientific
research projects, as well as the possibility of professional development of
young researchers engaged in projects. This opportunity is enabled through
national research projects wherein one of the most important evaluation
criteria is the support of researchers’ mobility as well as the possibility for
PhD students whose mentors are from abroad to realize part of their research in
the institutions of their mentors. Moreover, through the first Centre of
Excellence, one area of evaluation was international cooperation and mobility
of researchers, as well as for large collaborative research grants.
Mobility
of researchers is realised through bilateral scientific and technological (S&T)
cooperation that Montenegro has with seven countries.
Through
multilateral S&T cooperation, Montenegro enables mobility of researchers
through FP7, COST, IPA IV, EUREKA and JRC, as well as through new the EU
Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 (2014-2020).
Furthermore,
particular attention is devoted to increasing visibility of the scientific
activities and to mobility opportunities to the public, through continuous
support of the Ministry of Science, the Ministry of Education and the
University’s web portal, as well as EURAXESS Montenegro portal. The EURAXESS
portal contains four main pillars, all devoted to researcher mobility: jobs,
services, rights for researchers and links. Montenegro encourages the
implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct
for the Recruitment of Researchers. All three universities in Montenegro are
signatories to the Charter and the Code. 

 Researchers careers

The
Ministry of Science has been providing support to young researchers through the
engagement of young researchers in national scientific research projects for a
period of three years, with the obligation to defend the master or doctoral
thesis. The call for co-financing national scientific research projects has given
priority to projects in which young researchers are engaged. The Centre of
Excellence and large research grants also provide the possibility for engaging
young researchers as well as their full employment during the project’s
lifetime.

 Cross-border access to and
     portability of national grants

Bilateral
cooperation is implemented through co-financing of joint research projects,
already financed as national projects, in the form of mutual visits (costs of
travel and subsistence) for researchers from Montenegro and the partner
countries, which will perform joint research projects. 
Costs
related to the exchange of researchers are reimbursed in the following way:
·        
The party hosting
a researcher covers the costs of accommodation and subsistence,
·        
The party sending
a researcher covers the costs of travel between the sites of cooperating
institutions.
The
call for financing bilateral projects is open for holders (research institutes
and faculties) of a current national research project grant from the Ministry
of Science of Montenegro.
One
of the main criteria for all research programmes that the Ministry finances is
international cooperation. Therefore, one of the evaluation criteria for
national programmes was multilateral
networking and regional linking. This was an obligatory criterion for the
Centre of Excellence and large research grants as well.
Therefore, the international institutions have access to national grants for
activities such as: costs for researchers from an international partner’s
institution engaged to exchange experience, teach and conduct research under
the project; and costs for travel expenses – including travel costs,
accommodation and subsistence. Also, through the EUREKA programme, the Ministry
supports projects that Montenegrin companies conducted with international
partners. 

 Support to structured innovative
     doctoral training programmes

Montenegro
supports doctoral training programmes through several measures. As mentioned,
through national research projects, Ministry of Science supports the engagement
of PhD students in scientific institutions, for a three-year period, as well as
through the Centre of Excellence and large research grants. Also, through an
annual call on co-financing scientific research activities, the Ministry of
Science financially supports PhD studies after finishing the doctoral thesis.
Doctoral training programmes are additionally
supported through the Higher Education and Research for Innovation and
Competiveness Project – HERIC, through Promoting a Scholarship Program for
Master’s, PhD and Postdoctoral Studies, while the Ministry of Science supports
PhD and Postdoctoral Studies and the Ministry of Education supports master
studies. It will be the first time that the country has committed such a large
amount for scholarships to support students and researchers. The PhD scheme
will fund students who are already in a full-time PhD programme in Montenegro
or employed in Montenegro and in a fulltime PhD programme abroad. This scheme
will support periods between six months and two years abroad to gain
international expertise particularly that which cannot be obtained in
Montenegro as part of the PhD programme. The students will return to Montenegro
to complete their doctoral theses.
The
programme will also help build national capacity for participation in the EU
Horizon 2020 programme. The entire structure of the scheme, and especially the
evaluation procedure, is modelled by Horizon 2020. This will give students and
researchers invaluable experience in applying for funding modelled on that of
the Marie Sklodowska Curie fellowship scheme. This will certainly give an
advantage to national students and researchers if they decide to apply for
European funding in the future. 
The
Scholarship Scheme is being finalised and the final draft is expected by
September 2014.

 Support mobility between private
     and public sector

Montenegro
supports mobility between the private and public sectors through the
implementation of the Centre of Excellence and large collaborative research
grants. For both programmes, cooperation between scientific research
institutions and at least one company is obligatory.  
Priority: Gender balance and gender
contents in research

 Foster cultural and institutional
     change on gender

Legal
and strategic framework
According
to the Law on Scientific Research Activities,
conduct of scientific research activities is free and available to all domestic
and foreign physical and legal persons (Article 3). 
The
Law on Gender Equality prescribes equal
participation of women and men, equal positions and equal opportunities for
exercising all rights and freedoms, as well as the use of personal knowledge
and abilities for the development of society. 
The
Anti-Discrimination Law prohibits any form of discrimination on any grounds and
determines measures to combat discrimination. 
The
Ministry of Science nominated a contact person for gender equality in science
in 2011, responsible for the annual reporting on
the implementation of the measures provided by the Plan of activities for
achieving gender equality (PAPRR). 
The
Ministry of Science nominated representatives in the Helsinki group on Women in Science in September 2013. 
Regarding
promotional activities, the contact person for gender equality in science
actively promotes the call for scholarships in the field of natural sciences
for 2013, UNESCO – L'Oreal – 15 scholarships for
young women scientists and Marie Curie Programme – Family friendly approach. 

 Gender balance in decision making
     process

Women
in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2012
 POSITION || TOTAL || Women || % 
 Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 46 || 10 || 21,74 
 Rector m./f. || 3 || 0 || 0 
Women
in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2013
 POSITION || TOTAL || Women || % 
 Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 56 || 13 || 23,21 
 Rector m./f. || 3 || 0 || 0 
Women
in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2013
 POSITION || TOTAL || Women || % 
 Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 56 || 13 || 23,21 
 Rector m./f. || 3 || 1 || 33,33 
According
to UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics publication: Women in science – Explore
the data for countries worldwide, 50% of researchers are women in Montenegro. 
More
female researchers work in the academic and government sectors while more men
work in the private research sector, which offers better salaries and
opportunities for advancement.
Women
researchers:
·        
Public sector – 57%
·        
Academic institutions – 48%
·        
Private sector – 38%
In
the Report on the implementation of the Action plan for achieving gender
equality (2013-2017) for 2013, the Ministry of Science was responsible for the
following gender specific activities:  
·        
Successful women in science award (for
both 2012 and 2013), 
·        
Support through funding: “Interaction of
legal cultures and religions in medieval Zeta coastal towns and their impact on
the identity of a woman" project (2012-2015). 
Priority: Knowledge circulation

 Open access for publications and
     data resulting from publicly funded research

Through
the call for co-financing scientific research activities, the Ministry of
Science stimulates research activities on an annual basis, including the
publication of scientific work in relevant scientific journals. In that way,
scientific work is published in international journals from the following
lists: SCI (Science Citation Index Expanded), SSCI (Social Sciences Citation
Index Journal List). This is done in accordance with the areas of science JRC
(Journal Citation Report Science Edition and Social Science Edition), as well
as in journals from list A&HCI (Art and Humanities Citation Index), with
impact factor bigger than zero. Applicants should provide evidence in their
applications of published scientific work in these sources.

 Open innovation (OI) and knowledge
     transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

The
measures for the implementation of EU policies in the field of
Science-Technology-Innovations point to the need for strengthening the
knowledge users sector. This also calls to development of further initiatives
in connecting the public and private sectors, the possibility of strengthening
the private sector, linking initiatives between researchers in the public and
private sectors, as well as encouraging research in the private sector. Special
efforts are aimed at building the national innovation systems and the
efficiency that consists of successful exploitation and commercialization of
knowledge and research results in the manufacturing and service sectors. Organizations
that promote the association of scientific research and manufacturing sectors,
such as the Directorate for Development of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises,
Investment and Development Fund, Chamber of Commerce, the Centre for
Information and Innovation, Enterprise Europe Network (EEN), and other national
and international agencies and funds, are especially important in Montenegro.  
To
encourage innovation a Centre of Excellence was awarded to the Faculty of
Electrical Engineering, University of Montenegro in Podgorica, for the
implementation of the scientific research project Centre of Excellence in
Bioinformatics – BIO-ICT, which began on June 1, 2014. The first Centre of
Excellence in Montenegro will be financed up to EUR 3.42 million. Implementation
of the first Centre of Excellence in Montenegro will contribute to the
establishment of partnerships at national and international level. The Centre
will provide funding for research through cooperation with businesses and train
a new generation of young talented scientists, researchers and inventors, with
a view to greater creativity and innovation. The Centre of Excellence will
create long-term focused programmes and provide stable sources of financing and
combine knowledge, research and innovation, that is, establish a close link
between research and the economy. Through implementation of large research
grants, support for larger and more impactful R&D subprojects that nurture
international collaboration will be enabled, which ultimately will generate
commercial innovations and strengthen the Montenegrin economy. The Ministry of
Science has agreed to finance four projects over a contracting period of three
years from June 1, 2014 to May 31, 2017, for a total of EUR 1.34 million.
On
May 20, 2014, the Ministry established the second call for research grants with
the deadline for submission on September 19, 2014, for a total of EUR 1.2
million.
Also,
stimulating innovations will be enabled through the establishment of the first
Science Technology Parks – a networking structure headquartered in Podgorica
and three decentralized units (“Impulse Centers”) in Nikšić, Bar and
Pljevlja, which will enable better connections between knowledge, research and
innovation. STP will stimulate the development of entrepreneurship based on the
new knowledge as a result of scientific research, encourage the exchange of new
technologies between universities, scientific research institutions, companies
and markets, and facilitate the creation and growth of companies based on superior
scientific results turned into innovation, through the incubation processes and
the establishment of spin-off companies. The establishment of the first STP in
Montenegro will contribute to a significant change in the institutional
framework for research, development and innovation. 
Also,
through the establishment of local and regional business incubators, clusters
and using voucher schemes for innovation, the internationalization and
commercialization of research will be promoted, and the demand for consulting
services, innovation in manufacturing and services, organization and marketing
will increase. These models will encourage the development of innovation and
entrepreneurial activity as well as interaction with the academic community
(universities, institutes, faculties).  
In
addition, the training of public administrators to provide advisory services to
clients is required, as well as the development of internal regulations, and an
adequate representation of the scientific community in the regulation of
intellectual property rights at the national and international level. This type
of support will be implemented through the HERIC project, and it is necessary
to consider the possibility of using technical assistance of the European
Commission (e.g. TAIEX programme). All the scientific research institutions in
which knowledge products, that is, intellectual property is created, should
establish bodies, procedures and regulations to regulate the management of
intellectual property – from the issue of author’s rights in a project, the
right to register and check the feasibility of patents, technology transfer
(transfer of rights to a third party, contracting technology licenses) to the
provision of funding for the protection of intellectual property rights,
especially patent rights. 
Moreover, through the call for co-financing of
scientific-research activities, the Ministry
of Science stimulates the natural and legal persons from
Montenegro who during 2014 realize and protect patents or develop innovative
solutions that are applied in practice.
The
Ministry of Science in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy will prepare a
Law on Innovation Activities and submit it to the government for adoption in
2015, as well as an Innovation Strategy that will be prepared for adoption in
2016.
Harmonise
policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services
Computer
infrastructure (e-Infrastructure), as a part of the research infrastructure,
has developed significantly in Montenegro in the previous period.  
As
the basis for national research and education in IT infrastructure, the
Montenegrin Research and Education Network (MREN) was established in 2005, with
the aim to build, develop, maintain, and allow for the use of broadband ICT
infrastructure to all the scientific research and educational institutions in
Montenegro included into MREN, to interconnect them, and connect them with
related institutions included in the pan-European research network – GEANT. It
primarily provides users with internet access, information services and a
connection to other national and international networks. MREN is a full member
of the Trans-European Research and Education Networking Association – TERENA,
and it has been connected to GEANT since October 2010.  
The
Research Information System of Montenegro, E-CRIS.CG, contains information
about researchers and research institutions in Montenegro. In addition,
business automation and networking of libraries into a single library and the
information system COBISS.CG has continued.  
In
accordance with the National Library Digitization Programme adopted at the end
of 2008, the National Library of Montenegro “Đurđe Crnojević” in
Cetinje is developing a digital library. The library has so far scanned the
most important Montenegrin periodicals and old and rare books, while the
digital library is in the form of a web presentation.   
In
order to improve the system of support and better availability of information
to the scientific and wider community, a modern researchers’ registry portal,
“Scientific Network” was developed in 2014. The portal was developed on the
platform of E-CRIS universal application, which is a sophisticated information
system on the research activity that belongs to the generic information system
– CRIS (Current Research Information Systems). Establishment of the “Scientific
Network” will allow for more intensive cooperation and communication of
domestic researchers and institutions, both in the country and abroad and
provide information on the scientific diaspora as well. Currently, the
“Scientific Network” contains information about 1343 researchers and 56
research institutions in Montenegro.
Structure for the contribution of
Associated countries to the ERA Progress Report 2014- Norway 
Priority: More effective national
systems
1.      Research
and Innovation structure
The
Research Council of Norway (RCN) serves as the Government's major advisory body
on research policy issues. It is responsible for the development and
implementation of national research strategies and for promoting basic and
applied research and innovation policies. The RCN is also responsible for
evaluating research in Norway. 
Approximately
30 per cent of all public R&D funding is channelled through the RCN. The
remaining is directly allocated to the research institutions and to the
Norwegian contribution to the EU Framework programmes.   
The
RCN’s 2012 evaluation exercise found that the RCN is an effective and efficient
research funding organisation, ensuring cost-effective competitive allocation
of R&D funds in Norway. The evaluation concluded that more effort and
funding should be allocated to prospective studies and research projects to
counterbalance the inherently conservative tendencies stemming from stakeholder
consultation and the peer review process.
The
evaluation also found that the RCN made little systematic use of its evaluation
and prospective studies. Evaluations should be embedded in the programming
cycle and more effort should be devoted to better understanding the impacts of
RCNs activities. 
The
evaluation findings were taken into account in the development of the RCN’s new
evaluation policy of 2013. In 2014, the RCN established an evaluation group
with the objective to give advice and develop a systematic process to enable
the RCN to make more strategic choices and systematic use of evaluations. 
The
newly adopted government strategy on research and innovation cooperation with
the EU requests that the RCN increases its focus on the integration of national
and international schemes internally and externally. Similarly, the Norwegian
Research and Innovation System, Statistics and Indicators (2012) suggests that
it may be necessary for Norway to rethink its approach to an integrated
framework programme for research and innovation, with priorities and measures
allocated in accordance with the Innovation Union, thus also strengthening the
country’s relevance for participating in the internal market. As a response to this
a new project was launched to align national and international activities and
instruments of the RCN. The project will run throughout 2014 and lay the
foundation for a permanent set-up which more systematically involves
integration of national and international schemes. Objectives of the project
include closer cooperation between NCP's, R&D program coordinators and
boards as well as developing a tool kit for the optimal alignment of
international calls and strategic research and innovation agendas with national
calls and agendas.  
2.      National
strategy for Research and Innovation
Erna
Solberg’s government was appointed on 16 October 2013. It succeeded Jens
Stoltenberg’s Second Government (2005–2013). The main STI priorities announced
by the Solberg government are to:
·        
Continue building the knowledge society
through an ambitious education policy (including higher education), and
increased investments in research and the development of word-class research
capabilities.
·        
Strengthen the international dimensions
of research in Norway and focus on the ERA and Horizon 2020.
·        
Better coordinate and strategically
prioritise R&D-investments with predictability and transparency, through a
long-term national plan for research and higher education.
·        
Enhance the competiveness of Norwegian
businesses, by investing in innovation, knowledge, research and technology,
providing favourable framework conditions for businesses (including
strengthening the Norwegian tax credit scheme for R&D – Skattefunn) and
ensuring diversification of the Norwegian economy.
A
new strategy for research and innovation cooperation with Europe was
launched under the Solberg government by the Minister of Education and Research
in June 2014. The strategy sets out clear objectives and priorities for research
cooperation through the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and
Innovation and the European Research Area.
A
long term national plan for research and higher education was proposed during
Stoltenberg’s Second Government in the 2013 white paper on research entitled
«Long-term perspectives – knowledge provides opportunity», Meld. St. 18
(2012–2013). The plan aims to ensure that public investments in research and
higher education are long-term and well-coordinated, with clear priorities. The
Solberg government adopted the plan for research and higher education, which
will set out political priorities and a roadmap for public investments in key
research areas, building research infrastructure, fellowships and expanded
student enrolment capacity. The long term plan will be a tool for targeting
efforts towards areas in which Norway has a strategic advantage, such as in
marine research. 
An
important competitive advantage is that employee-driven innovation is more
common in Norway than elsewhere, a trend which coincides with unique
opportunities for cooperation and flow of knowledge between stakeholders in
research, industry, trade and society at large. Policy that facilitates such
flow and helps to integrate international cooperation more closely into it will
be high on the agenda.
The plan will be launched in fall
2014; it has a timeframe of 10 years and will be updated every four years.
3.      Research
and Innovation funding
The
Norwegian government officially adopted in 2005 the Barcelona target of the EU
(2002), i.e., a three per cent allocation of (GDP) on R&D by 2010 (later by
2020 within H2020). The Solberg government confirmed its commitment to the
target in 2013, but introduced a new target date of 2030 to achieve the goal. 
Public
budgets for R&D increased in real terms in four of the five past years,
with annual real growth of two per cent from 2009 to 2013. This includes
contributions to the EU framework programme and the SkatteFUNN R&D tax
incentive, the latter of which allows businesses and enterprises that are
subject to taxation in Norway to apply for a tax deduction of up to 30 per cent
of their R&D costs. Public R&D funding growth was lower than in the
preceding five year period (2005 - 2009), when annual real growth was five per
cent. Important drivers behind the increase in public budgets for R&D over
the past 10 years
include governmental commitment to increased investments in R&D, as well as
increased contributions to multinational research programmes such as the EU
framework programmes for research.
Norway
ranks below the EU average in terms of R&D expenditure as a share of GDP:
1.66 per cent in Norway compared to 2.06 per cent in the EU28 in 2012. The
difference is partly due to Norway’s high GDP (i.e. high denominator), the
second highest GDP per capita in Europe. Norway maintains a high R&D
expenditure per capita which is almost 60 per cent higher than that of the
EU28, but significantly lower than the total R&D expenditure per capita in
Sweden (3.41 per cent), Finland (3.55 per cent) and Denmark (2.99 per cent).[6] 
The
business sector expenditure (BERD) on R&D as a share of GDP was also lower
than the EU average in 2011 (0.86 per cent in Norway compared to 1.29 per cent
across the EU-28). The low BERD as a share of GDP is partly the result of the
profile of the Norwegian economy which is to a large extent based on raw
materials and natural resources. Firms within these sectors tend to have low
R&D-intensity, although Norwegian firms invest more in R&D than their
international counterparts in these areas. Norway also does not have large
firms within R&D intensive sectors, such as pharmaceuticals or ICT. Large
firms in these sectors traditionally invest heavily in R&D and consequently
they often make the difference between countries with high and low BERD
figures.   
The
business sector carried out R&D totalling €2.7b (NOK21.2b) in 2012
including tax credits, which represents 44 per cent of the total R&D
expenditure in Norway. The higher education sector, including university
hospitals, carried out 26 per cent, and the research institute sector carried
out 23 per cent of total R&D expenditure. Over a ten-year
period the most important growth in R&D expenditure was in the Higher
Education Institutions (HEI) sector, followed by the research institute sector.

Funding
from abroad has remained stable at around eight per cent of R&D expenditure
since 2005. Close to 20 per cent of the funding from abroad stems from the EU
framework programmes.
4.      Competitive
funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of
international peer review
Proposals
to ECN programmes are evaluated using scientific peer review. A 2001 background
report (No1) explains that in 2001, the use of peer review and other evaluation
measures for RCD programmes were found to be inadequate; measures have been
undertaken since then to improve and develop peer review principles since that
time. 
5.      Institutional
funding based on institutional assessment
In
Norway, the annual allocation of institutional funding (block-funding) to the
HEIs, the research institute sector and the four national health trusts is made
partly on the basis of research performance indicators.  
Performance-based
funding in HEIs
About
80 per cent of government funding for R&D in HEIs is channelled directly
from the Ministry of Education and Research, mainly as institutional funding.
Since 2003, a funding structure has been in place for these funds, which
consists of three core components:
·        
Basic
funds without detailed specifications of its use. This component initially
amounted to about 60 per cent of institutional funding (on average for all
HEIs), but has decreased somewhat.
·        
A
teaching component, in which funds are distributed on the basis of reported
student performance. This component initially amounted to about one-quarter of
institutional funding and has increased somewhat.  
·        
A
research component, which amounts to about 15 per cent of institutional
funding. This component is divided into two parts, a performance-based part and
a strategic part, within which earmarked funds are allocated to specific
institutions for positions for PhD students and for scientific equipment.
The
changes in the structure of core funds, although minor, indicate nevertheless a
shift to more emphasis on performance- and strategy-based core funding of
research by HEIs. In the 2014 budget, the block grant funding of HEIs was
increased by NOK 100 million, an increase which will be placed in the funding
portion that depends on research performance.
In
April 2014, the Solberg government initiated a thorough review of the entire
system of direct institutional funding in the HEI-system in Norway. The review
of the funding model will be carried out by an independent expert group.
According to its mandate, the expert group is expected to hand over its
recommendations to the government by the end of December 2014.     
Performance-based
funding in the research institute sector
A
system for block grant funding from the government ministries to the research
institute sector has been in place since 2009, and about 50 institutes are
covered by the system. A share of the block grants is allocated on the basis of
the institutes’ performance on selected indicators over the previous three
years. The performance-based share varies between 2.5–10 per cent for different
groups of institutes.
The
evaluation recommended simplifying the performance-based component of the funding
system, by reducing the number of indicators in the system, as well as removing
the system for determining the weights between the indicators. These
recommendations were followed in a 2013 revision of the funding system. The
indicators that were retained (and their weights) include: scientific
publications (30 per cent), number of awarded
doctoral degrees (five per cent), international research revenue (20 per cent) and revenue from
national contract research (45 per cent).
Priority: Transnational Cooperation
6.      Implement
joint research agendas
a.      FRAMEWORK
PROGRAMME
                                                 
i.     
Joint programming initiatives
Norway
participates in all Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) and in the EU
Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-plan), as these represent topics of
national importance. The JPIs target distinct social challenges and often
require involvement from several policy sectors, that is, several ministries.
To be able to participate in a successful manner requires harmonisation between
the JPI’s research agenda and the national agenda for the particular field. In
Norway this implies coordination within and between ministries: that is,
between the ministries and the RCN and between different research programmes in
the RCN. And last but not least, it also implies communication with the
scientific community and other relevant stakeholders. For each JPI, one
responsible ministry is appointed and this ministry appoints the delegate and
the expert to the governing board, and defines the role of RCN in the JPIs and
in the SET-plan. In RCN each JPI is organized as separate programmes with a
committed JPI coordinator, as well as an advisory board or network that
supports the Norwegian representatives in the governing board. The JPI
coordinators in RCN meet regularly to discuss management of JPIs, and are
closely connected to relevant national research programmes. 
Eight
of the ten JPIs Norway participate in have finalised their strategic research
agendas. Two further JPIs are in progress and will be finalised in 2014. 
JPI
Oceans, JPI Climate, JPI for Agriculture, Food security and Climate Change (JPI
FACCE), JPI for Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life (JPI HDHL) and JPI for Urban
Europe represent areas of national importance with recently developed
governmental research agendas / white papers. 
JPI
Oceans, JPI FACCE, JPI HDHL, JPI on antimicrobial resistance (JPI AMR) and JPI
Urban Europe have inter-ministerial groups coordinating their activities. 
The
Commission supported the JPIs in 2013/2014 with networking projects to develop
the JPIs and joint calls with the MS/AC (ERA-NET Co-fund). Norway participated
in the following projects:  
·        
For JPI Climate, JPI FACCE, JPND, JPI
Water Challenges, JPI Urban Europe, JPI on Cultural Heritage (JPI CH), JPI
HDHL, Norway participated in several calls. 
·        
Participation in JPI CH, JPI Water
challenges and JPI AMR.  
·        
JPI Urban Europe and JPI Oceans related
to several research programmes in RCN and have established cooperation with
these.
JPI
participation contributes to the Norwegian priorities and goals both
nationally and internationally. In particular, the JPI Oceans is a research
area of high national priority. Norway was one of the main countries initiating
this topic as a theme for a JPI, and now leads the secretariat administrating
JPI Oceans. A new pilot action «Intercalibration for the coastal and
transitional waters of the EU Water Framework Directive» was approved at the
last JPI Oceans Management Board. This action is also of considerable policy
importance for Norway. And, in cooperation with other initiatives the JPI
Oceans established a new database on Marine Research Infrastructures.
b.      Other
joint research agendas
In
addition to JPIs, Norway participates actively in all transnational research
and innovation at the Nordic level. Nordic collaboration
has been and still is an important part of the overall Norwegian policy for
internationalisation of Norwegian research is a central platform for the wider
national efforts to develop ERA.  
7.      Openness
of Member State/Associated Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation 
Norway
engages in international research cooperation for three main reasons:
·        
To
address global challenges,
·        
To
increase the quality and relevance of Norwegian research, and
·        
To
increase the competitiveness of Norwegian businesses.
The
White Paper entitled Long-term perspectives – knowledge provides opportunity
(Report to the Storting, 2012-2013) identifies eight
countries outside the EU that are prioritized for strategic research
cooperation. These are China, Brazil, India, Russia, Canada, USA, South-Africa
and Japan. The Minister of Education and Research recently decided to develop a
national strategy on how international cooperation in higher education and
research with the BRIC countries could be further strengthened. The strategy is
expected to be finalized in 2015. 
To
promote international research cooperation with strategic partners, Norway
initiates bilateral cooperation with other countries in various forms and
participates in a number of multilateral initiatives. These are usually
initiated or supported at a European level. 
To
improve national understanding of international research cooperation and enable
Norway to develop better priorities and informed decisions, the RCN
commissioned an extensive bibliometric analysis of all research publications by
Norwegian authors and their cooperation (co-authorship) with more than 50 other
countries. The results of this analysis will also feed into an RCNs initiative
to develop road maps for priorities in future cooperation with eight prioritized
third countries. The roadmaps are expected to be finalized in 2014. 
Norway
is an active participant in the Strategic Forum for International S&T
Cooperation (SFIC) which is becoming increasingly important for the country’s
strategic approach to international research cooperation. There is strong
overlap between priorities in SFIC and Norway.  
Priority: Research Infrastructures
8.      Financial
commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional
Research infrastructures of pan-European interest
a.      Participation
in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the
ESFRI Roadmap
The
first version of the Norwegian Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (RI) was
published in 2010. It presented large-scale projects of national importance
that had achieved very high ranking in the first call for funding after the
establishment of a new National Financing Initiative for Research
Infrastructure in the White Paper ‘Climate for Research’ (2008-2009)
(Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2009). The roadmap was updated
in 2012 and was updated again in April 2014. Operational costs for using RI are
eligible in all of RCN’s funding schemes. 
Research
infrastructures include advanced scientific equipment, large-scale research
facilities, scientific databases and collections, and electronic infrastructure
(e-infrastructure). 
The
RCN is responsible for developing a Norwegian roadmap for investments in RI and
for updating the national RI roadmap on a bi-annual basis. The roadmap is
restricted to projects found to be ready for investment through a two-step
quality assessment procedure based on international evaluation committees.
These investments must be selected on the basis of stringent criteria in terms
of quality as well as relevance and benefit to society. RCN has to assess grant
applications for RI involving investment costs starting at NOK 2 million
upwards, and can grant a maximum of NOK 200 million in project funding.
Recommendations for allocations of over NOK 200 million must be submitted by
the RCN to the relevant ministry for special consideration and, possibly, final
allocation of funding.  
There
is no national scheme available for RI with investment costs less than NOK 2
million. RI of this magnitude is the responsibility of the research performing
organisations (PROs and HEIs), which are free to finance whatever scientific
equipment they
judge appropriate. 
The
Ministry of Education and Research is responsible for following Norwegian
participation in projects on the ESFRI Roadmap to the RCN. Projects in the
ESFRI roadmap in which Norway participates in the preparatory phase have to
undergo a thorough review by RCN and have to be considered by RCN to be of
major strategic importance for Norwegian research, before they are included
in the Norwegian roadmap.
Norway
is currently participating in the construction phase of 12 different ESFRI
projects with funding from the national financing initiative for research
infrastructure. Norway hosted the CESSDA AS meeting in Bergen, held in December
2013. Norway also offered to host SIOS and ECCSEL which are being planned with
broad international participation. Norway will also contribute to the construction
of the European Spallation Source (ESS) in Sweden with 2.5 per cent of the
total construction costs. 
The
Ministry of Education and Research and other relevant ministries have, on the
basis of the Research Council recommendations and funding through the national
infrastructure road map, committed Norway as a member of the pan- European
research infrastructures ELIXIR (bioinformatics) and as an observer in CLARIN
ERIC , ESSurvey ERIC , BBMRI ERIC and Euro Argo ERIC. The Research Council also
allocated funds for UNINETT Sigma, a subsidiary of the UNINETT[7], for
their participation in Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe (PRACE).
Norway also participates in planning EISCAT_3D radars in Northern Scandinavia. 
In
addition, Norway takes part or participated in 12 other preparatory phase
projects of the ESFRI Roadmap. Decisions on Norway’s commitments to these
ESFRI-projects will be taken based on the outcome of open, competitive calls in
the national financing initiative for research infrastructure.  
In
general, there are no legal barriers to cross-border access to RI in Norway.  
b.      Participation
in ERICs
With regards participating in the
European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Norway is observer in three out of
the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission
to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of
European interest involving several European countries, namely ESS ERIC, BBMRI
ERIC and EURO-Argo ERIC.
Priority: Open labour markets for
researchers
9.      Open,
transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers
There
is a long tradition of meritocracy and open and transparent recruiting
processes in Norwegian academia. All vacant positions over one year in length
must be publically announced and all are evaluated by a peer review committee.
In recent years, compulsory international announcement of vacancies, combined
with a cultural change towards internationalisation at most Norwegian HEIs has
improved international recruitment substantially. 
In
2012, 20 per cent of academic personnel in Norway were non-Norwegian citizens.
This is a 150 per cent increase in 10 years. To continue the positive trend,
the Government and the HEIs will cooperate further to improve routines and
practices for open international recruitment of researchers.
10.  Researchers
careers
Given
the increase in international staff at Norwegian HEIs, the next step is to
improve practices for better career policies. The RCN and The Norwegian
Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) concluded that the HEIs do
not have robust and systematic career policies in place, and that there is a
demand for this, not least by younger staff.
Here,
formal structures (regulations, national and local strategies, Charter &
Code, etc) and traditions and cultural dimensions both among leaders and the
individual researchers have to be combined. The present government has
therefore included Researchers Careers as one of its seven main points for
better quality in the Norwegian knowledge sector. Parallel to this, UHR has
established a working group on the same topic. The Research Council, the
Ministry and the UHR are working closely to coordinate and combine efforts to
improve the situation.
A
significant number of HEIs have signed the contract for HR excellence in
research, and five out of eight Norwegian universities have so far obtained the
logo.
11.  Cross-border
access to and portability of national grants
Researchers
of any nationality can apply for research funding to the Research Council of
Norway.  They do not need any employment contract with a national research
institution, however all submissions to the Research Council must be submitted
through a national research institution. The regulations of the Research
Council allow for funding on research and innovation projects to be spent by
partners abroad. The requirement is that the activity supports the purpose of
the call. The regulation also allows for researchers at national research
institutions, with projects funded by the Research Council, to take the grant
with her/him to a foreign research institution in the case of change of
employment. As the funding contract is between a national research institution
and the Research Council, this requires consent from the national research
institution.
12.  Support
structured innovative doctoral training programmes
PhD
education in Norway has since 2003 had a compulsory course programme (30 ECTs).
Courses include academic as well as generic and transferable skills. Norwegian
PhD education was evaluated in 2012. Among the conclusions were the need to
strengthen the supervisor’s competence in general and importance of supervision
practices in developing candidates’ generic skills. The Recommended
Guidelines for the Doctor of Philosophiae Degree made by UHR also
underlines the responsibility of the supervisor.
UHR
has established a group to look at researchers’ careers, also outside the HEI
sector. The IDT-principles are a basis for this discussion. UHR also cooperates
with the research institute sector and the RCN to identify and deal with
challenges between the two sectors. The research institutes have a great
potential as partners/resources in PhD education. 
UHR
is about to establish a new national working group with a mandate to identify
and resolve a set of challenges related to joint PhD degrees. Among other
things, the group will deal with quality assurance, challenges related to
legislation/regulations and funding and joint degrees as a component of
internationalisation. 
A
scheme for industrial PhDs has been established to increase the recruitment of
researchers to Norwegian industry, boost long-term competence-building,
increase research efforts in business and industry, and enhance interaction
between academia and industry. Currently there are 162 candidates in the
scheme. This year a similar scheme for public sector PhDs was established.
A
scheme of National Research Schools provides
funding to 15 national researcher schools across the country. The schools are
managed by the RCN. The aim of the scheme is to improve the quality of PhD
training, and increase the rate of PhD students completing the program, and
shorten the time to degree.
13.  Support
mobility between private and public sector
There
is significant mobility of researchers between sectors in Norway. A survey
(SIM-ReC) showed that 34 per cent of researchers in the HEI sector had
experience from working in other sectors, the average among the participating
countries in the survey was 23 per cent. Of the PhD candidates, 60 per cent
found employment outside the HEI sector. 
There
remains a challenge, however, to increase mobility and knowledge sharing across
sectors. The introduction of industrial PhDs is one important tool. Another
tool is to encourage the establishment of professor II/associate professor II
positions among HEIs and private sector/industry. These are positions where
researchers hold a position in one institution in addition to their full-time
permanent position in another institution.
Priority: Gender balance and gender
contents in research
14.  Foster
cultural and institutional change on gender
a.      National
policies on gender equality in public research
The
government implemented several measures to strengthen gender balance in the
higher education sector. In 2004 the Ministry of Education and Research
appointed the Committee for Gender Balance in Research
(http://eng.kifinfo.no/). The current KIF-committee started up in January 2014
for a new three year period. The mandate of the committee will now include
diversity and gender in the content of research in addition to gender balance. 
All
state higher education institutions are expected to adopt action plans for
gender equality, and the Ministry has established a gender equality prize that
is awarded to the university, the university college or the research institute
with best results on improving the gender balance within the institution. 
Gender
equality is implemented in legislation, requiring a minimum of 40 per cent of
each sex in the composition of boards, panels and committees. Practising gender
balance as a standard requirement has successfully brought Norway and other
Nordic countries to a European lead position of the share of women on
scientific boards and in management positions. However, Norway is at the
European average when it comes to the total share of women faculty and women in
grade A positions. 
Experience
shows that a proactive policy has significant effect. One example is the
University of Tromsø, which has shifted from being the Norwegian university
with the lowest share of women professors (9 per cent in 2002), to the
university with the highest share (30 per cent) ten years later. This progress
is a result of concrete actions and dedicated leadership. Another example is
the Norwegian Centres of Excellence (CoE) scheme. When the Research Council
introduced a set of «soft push» measures to counter gender imbalance at the
second CoE call in 2005, the results were satisfactory. The same results have
been also achieved in the last call of the CoE-scheme in 2011/2012. These experiences
are examples of good practice on how to significantly increase the
involvement of women in schemes of excellence in science. 
In
2013 the RCN launched a new policy on gender equality and gender perspectives
in research and innovation. Building on former policies, the Research Council
wants to be a driving force, both nationally and internationally. The Director
General of RCN states that Norway must aspire to become one of the leading
countries in Europe in this area.   
To
boost gender balance at the highest levels in Norwegian research, the Research
Council in 2013 initiated a new program on Gender Balance in Senior Positions
and Research Management, called BALANSE. This new program funds innovative
measures and supports mutual learning between different parts of the research
system, both in the public sector and in private industry. 
The
RCN is also involved in a new policy-oriented ERA-NET GENDER-NET, set up in
October 2013. GENDER-NET is led by CNRS in France and consists of 12 different
partners from 11 countries. The overall objective is to promote gender equality
in research institutions and the integration of the gender dimension in
research content, by sharing best practice, optimizing transferability and
proposing joint initiatives and indicators for monitoring and progress.  
The
information centre KILDEN systematically disseminates research-based knowledge
on gender in Norway. KILDEN has the national responsibility for promotion and
information about Norwegian gender research nationally and abroad and promotes
the documentation of resources and activities within gender research in Norway.
KILDEN’s target groups are gender researchers, the academic communities in
general, journalists, politicians, public administrators, students and the public
in general.
Priority: Knowledge circulation
15.  Open
access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research
Productive
cooperation and use of R&D depends on access to research results. In
principle, all research that is wholly or partially funded by public sources
must be made openly accessible. This is stated in the White Paper ‘Climate
for Research’ (2008-2009). This was followed by the establishment of
CRISTin, a public open access database for research publications. In 2012 and
2013, CRIStin focused on the following areas: 
·        
The Ministry of Education and
Research's project on Open Access,
·        
Infrastructure related to institutional
repositories, and
·        
Networking and information. 
There
is also ongoing work in the RCN to implement these policy goals and to develop
national policies on both open access to publication and to scientific data.
16.  Open
innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors
Both open innovation and knowledge transfer have
been issues in government policies for higher education and research of
considerable importance for years. Since the change of the University Act and
the Employee Invention Act in 2003, Norway has undertaken a large number of
activities promoting knowledge transfer, such as: 
·        
Coordinating
IP policies for universities, 
·        
Launching
several research programs aimed at commercialization, and
·        
Innovation
and co-operation between research communities and actors within the business
sectors, NGOs and public sector. 
The increasing policy focus on open innovation
issues does not undermine current IP policies. On the contrary, insights from
the open innovation perspective make policy makers more conscious about when
and how IP policy measures should be appropriately applied. 
The Government
commissioned in 2014 an assessment of the policy instruments for knowledge
transfer and commercialisation of publicly-funded research in Norway. The
results of the evaluation are expected by June 2015.  
Switzerland
Priority: More effective national
systems

 Research and Innovation structure

Swiss research policy is characterised
by continuity and stability, including the level of R&D spending. Important
characteristics of R&D funding in Switzerland are the high priority of
competition in selecting organisations for funding, the bottom-up principle in
defining the content (i.e. no thematic programmes), and the absence of instruments
to directly support private R&D. 
Political responsibilities for research
and higher education are divided between the federal state (Confederation) and
the regional authorities (the Cantons). The Confederation is responsible for
the direct funding of research and the coordination of research activities. The
Confederation is responsible for the two Federal Institutes of Technology
(FITs) in Zurich (ETHZ) and Lausanne (EPFL). The Cantons are responsible for
their universities, while a national act regulates federal support to these
institutions. 
At the federal level, as of 2013
responsibilities for research and higher education are concentrated in the
State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), which is part
of the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research (EAER).[8] 
At the intermediary level, the main
actors are the two project funding agencies – the Swiss National Science
Foundation (SNSF) and the Swiss Innovation Promotion Agency (CTI)- and an
advisory body, the Swiss Science and Innovation Council. The Swiss National
Science Foundation (SNSF) is a private foundation, overseen by the State
Secretariat for Education and Research and Innovation (SERI, part of EAER) and
funded by the Confederation, responsible for the funding of basic research.
Moreover, it manages the programme aiming to create ‘National Centres of
Competence in Research’ (NCCR) at the national level as well as  National
Research Programmes (NRP). The Swiss Innovation Promotion Agency (CTI) is the
federal agency for innovation, which supports joint projects of universities
and private companies as well as innovation activities. 

 Research and Innovation funding

The parliamentary bill ‘Message on the
promotion of education, research and innovation for 2013-2016’ increases the
amount of grant funding awarded on a competitive basis for research and
innovation.

 Competitive funding through calls
     for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

Competitive funding lies at the core of
the Swiss research and innovation system: both SNSF and CTI allocate their
competitive funding by submitting projects to a thorough peer review in line
with international standards. 
With
regard to the SNSF’s project funding, which is the SNSF’s main instrument[9], external reviewers assess the applications
on the basis of the criteria specified by the SNSF such as the scientific
quality of the research proposal, the scientific value and relevance of the
project, the originality of research objectives, the adequacy of methodical
approach, the feasibility of the project, the scientific track record of the
applicants and the applicants' expertise in relation to the project. The
reviewers work independently of each other and their assessments are made
available to the applicants in full on the mySNF platform. The reviewer's
identity remains concealed. Decisions are based on clearly defined procedures
and rules. Researchers receive clear and useful information concerning the
evaluation of their applications and the respective decisions of the SNSF.
In
the context of the SNSF’s career funding schemes, the transmission of external
reviews is mandatory for all applications within the scope of Ambizione and
SNSF professorships which reach the second stage as well as for Assistant
Professor Energy Grants. For all other career funding schemes, an external
review is possible but not mandatory. The referee and the co-referee decide
whether an external review is required.
The
CTI promotes applied research and development projects involving both
universities and industry. While it is open to any discipline, the main focus
of its promotional activities is on life sciences, engineering,
nanotechnologies, microsystems technology and enabling sciences. The
promotional activities of the CTI are based on the “bottom up” approach.
Similar to the SNF, the CTI uses a peer-review process to evaluate and select
projects. Only universities and universities of applied sciences are eligible
for funding.

 Institutional funding based on
     institutional assessment

Political
responsibilities for research and higher education are divided between the
federal state (Confederation) and the regional authorities (the Cantons). The
Confederation is responsible for the direct funding of research and for the
coordination of research activities. The Confederation is responsible for the
two Federal Institutes of Technology (FITs) in Zurich (ETHZ) and Lausanne
(EPFL). The Cantons are responsible for their universities, while the Federal
Law on Financial Aid to Universities (UFG) regulates federal support to these
institutions. The Federal Law on Financial Aid to Universities obliges the
Swiss Confederation and the cantons to safeguard and improve the quality of
teaching and research in higher education (Article 7); furthermore, the UFG
defines the review of the performance quality of a university as a prerequisite
for federal subsidies (Article 11, Paragraph 3, Letter a.). The requirements in
respect of quality assurance of universities and the conduct of the audit by the
Swiss Center of Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (OAQ)
are laid down in the ‘Quality Assurance Guidelines ’. These are compatible with
the ‘European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European
Higher Education Area (ESG) ’, which were developed by the European Association
for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA).
Priority: Transnational Cooperation
Switzerland has a long tradition of
participation in international programmes at European level. At present around
12per cent of all federal resources for the promotion of education, research
and innovation go to international cooperation activities. 

 Implement joint research agendas
  FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

                                                             
i.     
Joint programming initiatives
Cooperation
between countries is fostered by the EU Framework Programme. The share of
participation of Switzerland in total participation under FP 7 was 3.31 per
cent, and Switzerland received 4.4 per cent of total EC contributions.[10] 
Switzerland
also participates in the Cooperation in Science and Technology in Europe
(COST), where the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation
provides additional funding for research in COST actions with Swiss
participation.
                                                           
ii.     
ART. 185 initiatives
Switzerland
is also involved in four Art. 185 Initiatives: Active and Assisted Living
Research and Development Programme (AAL), Eurostars, European Metrology
Research Programme (EMPIR) and European Developing Countries Clinical Trials
Partnership (EDCTP).
                                                         
iii.     
ERA-Nets
At
present Switzerland is taking part in some 25 ERA-NET initiatives (ERA-NET and
ERA-Net plus) covering several areas of research as well as in 5 JPIs. Through
project funding or the National Research Programmes (NRPs) the SNFS supports
researchers’ participation in Joint Programming Initiatives or ERA-NETs. For
example, research groups in the NRPs 68 and 69 can submit proposals for EU
Joint Programming Initiatives. In addition to their own budget of 13 million
Swiss Francs each, NRP 68 and NRP 69 have together up to 4 million Swiss Francs
available for participating in calls of JPIs, such as FACCE – JPI. Moreover,
since the activities coordinated by the European Science Foundation (ESF) are
scheduled to end by 2015 and Joint Programming Initiatives are taking time to
get off the ground, ERA-NETs are becoming increasingly important.

  Other joint research agendas

Switzerland
further participates in the European technology initiative EUREKA, where Swiss
participations are funded through the CTI. Switzerland holds the EUREKA
Chairmanship from July 2014 until June 2015. 
Switzerland
also maintains membership in the following international research organisations
and initiatives: ESA, CERN, ESRF, EMB, ESO, ILL, CIESM and HFSP. 
In
general, Swiss participation in international programmes and opening of
national programmes reflects the decentralised nature of Swiss research policy
and less focus on grand challenges. Research funding organisations are
generally both willing and adequately funded to participate.

 Openness of Member State/Associated
     Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation 

Whereas
in the past, federal policies on bilateral research cooperation were strongly
geared towards cooperation with Europe and North America, the Federal Council
has added new geographical regions since 2008. The strategic focus is currently
on new countries that offer significant scientific and technological
development potential. Eight non-European countries have been identified as
potential partners: China, India, Russia, South Africa (including research institutes
in Côte d'Ivoire and Tanzania) as well as Japan, South Korea and Brazil.
Corresponding framework agreements have either already been signed with the
governments of these countries or are currently in the pipeline. In the eight
federal bilateral research programmes launched so far, a total of 150 Joint
Research Projects (JRPs) are currently underway and around 400 exchange
projects (Faculty Exchange, Student Exchange and Joint Utilization of Advanced
Facilities) have been sponsored. Finally, funding has been provided for over 40
partnerships between higher education and research institutions. These
developments are also supported through the establishment of Swissnex offices,
science consulates promoting and supporting Swiss science in key locations around
the globe. 
Through
their joint programme, SCOPES, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
(SDC) and the SNSF support scientific collaboration between researchers in
Switzerland and their colleagues in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In Eastern
European countries the programme is designed to strengthen individual research
capacities, promote the institutional development of research and teaching, and
improve integration into the international scientific community. Swiss
researchers have already come to appreciate their partners in Eastern Europe
for their high levels of scientific competence, specialisation and creativity.
In addition, collaborative projects for which the Eastern European partners
have virtually no resources at their disposal permit comparative studies or
access to research objects such as ecosystems or patient pools. SCOPES
contributes to further increasing the performance and competitiveness of
Eastern European partners, in preparation for future collaboration in EU
Framework Programmes for Research.
Through
the Swiss Programme for Research on Global Issues for Development (r4d) the SDC
and the SNSF jointly support partnership projects between researchers in
Switzerland and in developing and emerging countries in Africa, Asia and Latin
America. r4d promotes development-relevant research on global issues which
through new insights and innovative approaches contributes to sustainable
global development. The focus is on reducing poverty and protecting public
goods in developing countries. There are five main topics: poverty reductions,
food security, supply and financing mechanisms in health care, sustainable use
of ecosystems and the mechanisms underlying causes and solutions in social
conflicts. Resources are also available for projects on topics freely chosen by
researchers.
Regarding
bi- or multilateral agreements or programmes among EU-MS and AC, the SNSF
reached an agreement with Germany (DFG) and Austria (FWF) concerning joint
financing of bilateral or trilateral projects. Moreover, bilateral Lead Agency
agreements were signed with the National Research Fund (FNR) of Luxembourg and
the French National Research Agency (ANR). 

 Interoperability, mutual
     recognition of evaluation results and other schemes 

The
mutual recognition of evaluations is becoming more and more important. For
instance, the SNSF developed procedures with Germany (DFG) and Austria (FWF)
concerning joint financing of bilateral or trilateral projects, where
submission and evaluation takes place in one of the three countries, while
funding is on national basis (lead agency procedures) or from the country where
most of the research is performed (money follows cooperation line procedure).
Moreover, bilateral Lead Agency agreements were signed with the National Research
Fund (FNR) of Luxembourg and the French ANR. With some other countries
discussions with regard to the mutual recognition of evaluations are underway. 
Common
funding principles to make national research programmes compatible,
interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers
International
integration and mobility are increasingly fundamental to researchers. In many
areas of specialisation international contacts are a precondition for excellent
research. Through the association Science Europe, which groups together its
sister organisations, the SNSF as part of the Grant Union is working to improve
the institutional framework conditions for international research. Existing
agreements serve to promote mobility within Europe (the Money Follows Researcher
scheme) and to facilitate joint research projects with specific countries (Lead
Agency or Money follows Cooperation Line). The SNSF is working to extend these
agreements, also to G8 countries.
As
mentioned above, the SNSF has signed a trilateral agreement with the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) in Germany and the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). A
bilateral agreement has been signed with the National Research Fund (FNR) of
Luxembourg. The agreements allow researchers in these countries to submit a joint
proposal to only one of the funding agencies, the "Lead Agency". The
Lead Agency is the funding agency that, in case of approval, will fund the
largest part of the project. It evaluates the entire proposal independently.
The partner organisation accepts the outcome of the evaluation and, in case of
a positive result, each organisation funds the part of the project that is
conducted in its country. 
Moreover, 
an other agreement allows Swiss researchers and their French partners to
jointly submit an application to a single organisation, the "Lead
Agency". The SNSF and the ANR have agreed to take turns as the Lead Agency
on a yearly basis. 
For
researchers moving abroad, it is possible to transfer Swiss National Science
Foundation (SNSF) funding to finalise the project. SNSF funding for stays
abroad is not restricted to the European Union, allowing outward mobility to
third countries as well. 
Regarding 
​the Money follows Cooperation Line, this is currently possible in
Germany and Austria (very small sub-projects) and in the UK (only in the
humanities and social sciences).
The
Money follows Researcher process is aimed at researchers who move abroad and
would like current SNSF funding to continue. In principle, a continuation of
the project is possible in any country. The project can either continue in
Switzerland while being managed from abroad or transferred to the new location.
Priority: Research Infrastructures

 Financial commitments for the
     construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures
     of pan-European interest

In
October 2013 the Federal Council approved Switzerland’s participation in ELIXIR
and authorised the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation to
sign the international ELIXIR Consortium Agreement.
a.
Participation in the development and operation of EIROs
Moreover,
Switzerland successfully participates in all of the eight EIROforum
organisations which have extensive expertise in the
areas of basic research and the management of large, international infrastructures,
facilities and research programmes. These research infrastructures are the
European Laboratory for Particle Physics in Geneva (CERN), European Space
Agency in Paris (ESA), European Southern Observatory in Garching and Telescope
in Chile (ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble (ESRF),
European X-ray Free-Electron Laser in Hamburg (European XFEL), Institute Max
von Laue - Paul Langevin in Grenoble (ILL), the European Molecular Biology
Conference in Heidelberg (EMBC), and EUROfusion (Swiss fusion research).
b.
Participation in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures
included in the ESFRI Roadmap
On
the basis of the Swiss Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (update of March
2012), in the parliamentary bill on the promotion of education, research and
innovation for 2013-2016 (‘Message on the promotion of education, research and
innovation for 2013-2016’ - ERI) the federal government confirmed its financial
commitment to the construction and operation of regional, national and
international research infrastructures of pan-European interest. The SERI can
mandate the SNSF to finance research infrastructures in particular subject
areas relating to the Swiss roadmap for research infrastructures and to the
ESFRI Roadmap (European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures). In the
period 2013 to 2016, according to the ERI bill, the SNSF will support
Switzerland’s participation in the European Social Survey (ESS), the Survey of
Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) and the Integrated Carbon
Observation System (ICOS), as well as in the Biobanking and Biomolecular
Resource Research Infrastructure (BBMRI), and the European Clinical Research
Infrastructures Network (ECRIN). 

  Participation in ERICs

ESFRI
has introduced a new legal framework (ERIC) for European Research Infrastructures
of the ESFRI Roadmap which is based on European law. Switzerland intends to
participate in several of these research infrastructures. However, some legal
issues of the ERIC framework do not correspond with Swiss Law, which leads to
the situation that Switzerland currently lacks the legal basis for
participation in these projects. Enabling the Swiss participation in ERIC
research infrastructures means adapting the Swiss law on research and innovation,
which needs the approval of the Federal Parliament. Currently, the issue is in
inter-ministerial discussion. The decision concerning the Swiss participation
in ERICs will be known by the beginning of 2015 at the latest. 

 Access to Research Infrastructures
     of pan-European interest

Switzerland
also invests funds in national top research infrastructures accessible to
foreign partners such as Swissfel, Swiss Light source, CSCS (Centro Svizzero di
Calcolo Scientifico/Swiss National Supercomputing Centre) and others. Swiss
research infrastructures are generally accessible to foreigners, also through
funds granted by EU research programmes. Nationals from EU/EFTA States can
benefit from the agreement on the free movement of persons to establish themselves
in Switzerland.[11]
Priority: Open labour markets for
researchers

 Open, transparent and merit based
     recruitment of researchers

All
universities and most of the other research institutions have signed the
Charter for Researchers and the Code on Conduct for the Recruitment of
Researchers of which Switzerland was an early adopter. Rules concerning
academic staff at Swiss universities make little or no distinction between
Swiss and foreign applicants. There are no recruitment procedures that may
hinder the openness or discourage participation of non-national applicants.
Within the framework of the Swiss-EU Bilateral Agreement on Free Movement of
Persons[12],
Switzerland has adopted the EU’s system of mutual recognition of foreign
qualifications issued by EU member states. Third-country nationals are also
entitled to apply for recognition of their foreign qualifications in
Switzerland.
As
a general rule any scientist working in Switzerland, regardless of their
nationality, can apply for funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation
(SNSF) and other public funding sources. 

 Cross-border access to and
     portability of national grants

With
respect to the portability of grants, the main principle for most European
countries is Money Follows Researcher: researchers who move abroad can ask for
ongoing SNSF funding to continue. All SNSF grants are portable to other
countries (worldwide) under the EUROHORCS ‘Money follows researcher’ scheme if
the project leader moves to another country during the grant period. The project
leaders can either manage the project from abroad or take the funds – including
employees – to their new institution. In 2013, 16 SNSF grants were transferred
in this way (compared to 15 SNSF grants in 2011), with a total transferred
amount of CHF 1.9 million (some EUR 1.54 million; compared to CHF 2.2 million
in 2011). Funding of whole research groups based abroad is generally not
allowed, though the Sinergia instrument allows funding of a single research
group based outside Switzerland but within a consortium of Swiss-based research
groups. 
Switzerland
has also been active in the EURAXESS initiative since 2008. Swissuniversities
acts as country coordinator and has also issued Euraxess Zurich the mandate to
participate in the Euraxess TOP 2 project (Enhancing the Outreach and
Effectiveness of the Euraxess Network). More detailed information can be found
in the country profile for Switzerland in the Researchers’ Report 2013.[13]

 Support structured innovative
     doctoral training programmes

The
Swiss University Conference Programme “Doctoral Programmes” (2012/2013-2016)
run by the Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS) is the
successor to the former ProDoc Programme (2008-2011). The Programme supports
universities in the creation and development of interuniversity doctoral
programmes in order to strengthen research networking and improve the
integration of doctoral students. The long-term objective of the Programme is
to offer appropriate training schemes to all doctoral students, including those
in humanities and social sciences and, in this way, to strengthen doctoral
education and the career prospects of doctorate holders.
At
the same time, the skills and competencies of researchers are increasingly
becoming an explicit part of doctoral training. This aspect is given special
consideration in the development of new doctoral programmes. All Swiss
universities share the same objectives in relation to doctorates. These are
laid down in the joint position paper by the Swiss universities on the
Doctorate: “Excellence through Research”[14]
. These are in line with the position of European countries within the Bologna
framework.
It
defines the purpose of the doctorate as being to:
·        
develop academic skills, especially the
ability to carry out independent scholarly research;
·        
acquire subject-specific (disciplinary
and interdisciplinary), methodological and transferable knowledge and skills;
·        
promote academic collaboration and
networks with other doctoral candidates as well as with researchers and
specialists in Switzerland and abroad.
The
doctorate qualifies candidates for research-based professions at universities
or other institutions (public sector, private enterprise, administration) and
enables them to take on diverse high-level responsibilities and functions.
The mentoring programmes of the Swiss
University Conference Sub-programme Equal Opportunity at Universities 2013-2016
offer structural courses to improve the necessary skills of young (women)
academics.

 Support mobility between private
     and public sector

In
general, Swiss Universities (not considering Universities of Applied Sciences)
focus on basic research whereas the private sector mainly undertakes applied
research. This division guarantees a complementarity between Universities and
the private sector, where proximity between both sectors is sought. For
instance, the pharmaceutics industry collaborates closely with Universities
throughout Switzerland (notably in Basel, Zurich, Geneva), and there are e.g.
common research labs of IBM and the ETH Zurich. Mobility between the private
sector and Universities takes thus place on an ad-hoc basis.
More
established programmes exist with regard to the Swiss Universities of Applied
Sciences: Researchers working in the Universities of Applied Sciences have
gained experience in higher education teaching and in the private sector
(‘double profile’). Thus, almost all researchers have moved at least once from
business to the public sector and vice versa during their career. Moreover,
researchers maintain close contacts with the business sector and the labour
market in general, as most research projects are carried out in collaboration
with external partners (both industrial and in areas such as health or social
work).
The
following key programmes have been designed to boost collaboration between
academia and industry, and to foster doctoral training in cooperation with
industry:
·        
Commission for Technology and Innovation
(CTI): The CTI supports R&D projects, and encourages entrepreneurship and
the development of start-up companies. It runs a coaching scheme that leads to
the award of the CTI Start-up Label, which is to help start-ups attract venture
capital. Moreover, it helps optimise knowledge and technology transfer through
the use of thematic and regional networks and platforms with a budget of some
EUR 125 million. The CTI funds the Universities of Applied Sciences in the execution
of research projects in close collaboration with industrial partners. 51.1per
cent of CTI project funding went to Universities of Applied Sciences in 2013[15].
·        
KTT Initiative (CTI) : This fosters the
transfer of Knowledge and Technology Transfer (KTT) between the Universities
and regional businesses. KTT consortia support SMEs and the Universities in
establishing contacts and developing projects. 
·        
National Research  Programmes (SNSF):
The National Research Programmes promote innovative solutions aimed at solving
Switzerland’s most pressing problems in collaboration with industrial partners.

·        
Venturelab (IFJ Startup support)  :
Venturelab was launched in 2004 as a national training program for innovative
high-tech startups. Working in close partnership with the CTI, Venturelab
organises venture ideas and venture challenge training modules at universities
all over Switzerland. In addition, Venturelab provides high level training
programmes for industry partners and corporate clients. Venturelab is run by
IFJ (Institut für Jungunternehmen/Institute for Start-ups)
·        
BREF Programme (Gebert Rüf Foundation +
Rectors' Conference of the Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences (KFH)): The
BREF Programme promotes collaboration between Switzerland’s business sector
and/or society and the Universities of Applied Sciences.
Priority: Gender balance and gender
contents in research

 Foster cultural and institutional
     change on gender

a.
National policies on gender equality in public research
The
Swiss Federal Equal Opportunity at Universities Programme has been designed to
promote gender equality at Swiss universities since the year 2000. For the
years 2013-16, the Swiss federal government has allocated CHF 9.8 million to
support the universities in their work to promote and ensure gender equality.
Pending decisions by the Swiss University Conference (SUC) and the Federal
Parliament, the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI)
oversees the disposition of the funds to the universities through the Rectors’
Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS). Universities receiving federal
funding must dedicate matching funds to gender equality work (usually 50 per
cent over the four-year period).
The
goal of the Federal Program is to achieve a quota of 25per cent female
professors at Swiss universities, and 40per cent women at the level of
assistant professor; in addition, the proportion of women in leading academic
positions and management bodies at universities and related institutions should
be increased. At present, however, these goals have not yet been reached.
For
the years 2013-16 the federal government only provides funding for gender equality
work done on the basis of the universities’ individual action plans. The plans
must address the issue of gender equality on a structural level in all key
areas of activity: teaching, research and outreach. 
The document Standards for Action Plans
53/11 defines the following areas as eligible for funding:
·        
Establishment of gender equality in
university structures and as part of the quality management
·        
Increasing percentages of women
professors (including assistant professors), women in academic decision-making
positions
·        
Training for PhD students and postdocs
·        
Work-life balance with respect to
studying at university, pursuing an academic career, family and
personal/private responsibilities  
·        
Women and STEM (science, technology,
engineering, mathematics)
·        
Human resources and organisational
development
·        
Integrating gender aspects into teaching
and learning (education) as well as research.
More detailed information can be found
in the country profile for Switzerland in the Researchers’ Report 2013 at http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/
services/researchPolicies.
Furthermore, the SNSF has adopted the
principle of gender mainstreaming and defined gender equality as a target for
all its bodies and across all its activities. It is closely monitoring
developments both in Switzerland and abroad and adjusting its funding schemes
to meet the changing needs of researchers.
b.
Careers – Working conditions in public research
The
SNSF has implemented a range of measures to increase the share of women in its
funding schemes. This includes mentoring programmes offering personal support
as well as specific schemes and measures to promote the research careers of
women.

 Gender balance in decision making
     process

With
appropriate measures, the SNSF aims to contribute to gender equality in
research funding. It has adopted the principle of gender mainstreaming and
defined gender equality as a target for all its bodies and across all its
activities. 
The
Swiss National Science Foundation promotes a representative gender balance in
the election of researchers in SNSF’s evaluation committees. A decision by SNSF
bodies not to include female researchers must be explicitly justified. The SNSF
has defined its commitment to gender equality in a mission statement. Apart
from the principles, the document also sets out gender equality standards and
measures for research funding and the Administrative Offices.
With
a view to finding new approaches to old challenges, the SNSF appointed a new
Gender Equality Commission at the beginning of May 2014. This independent body
composed of international experts will advise the SNSF on gender equality
issues and help in developing new strategies.

 Gender dimension in research
     content / programmes

A
National Research Programme (NRP) on gender equality is on-going in
Switzerland.[16] The NRP
"Gender Equality" (NRP 60) [17]
aims to analyse gender equality policy and measures in Switzerland and to
investigate the reasons for persisting inequalities between men and women. The
research findings should inform the development of a sustainable gender
equality policy. The research projects started in autumn 2010.
Priority: Knowledge circulation

 Open access for publications and
     data resulting from publicly funded research

Research
funded by the public should be publicly accessible as far as possible and, what
is more, free of charge. The SNSF is has therefore formulated a policy striving
to help establish open access, i.e. free access to scientific publications. It
expects researchers to self-archive their publications and supports publication
in OA journals.
With
regard to Open Access, researchers funded by the SNSF are obligated as before
to, at least, self-archive their work in addition to having it published for
the first time in a journal (Green Road to OA). In line with the policy of the
European Research Council, the SNSF is recommending solutions that involve
short embargo periods of no more than six months. If there is an option to publish
directly in an OA journal, the SNSF encourages researchers to choose this Gold
Road through a new supporting measure: as of October 2013, researchers will be
able to cover the corresponding publication costs through their project
budgets. Along with most other European research funders, the SNSF continues to
reject the option of OA of already published articles in a journal against a
fee (hybrid OA) as it involves double payment for the same service.
As
of 1 July 2014, researchers can also request funding for digital book
publications when submitting their project proposal. Book publications
resulting from projects submitted before 1 July 2014 or already approved
ongoing projects can be funded through the scheme "publication
grants" till the end of 2017.[18]

 Open innovation (OI) and knowledge
     transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

a.
National support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction
Several
parliamentary motions were introduced in the past years to ensure greater
transparency and cooperation in the area of research policy. The Federal Law on
the Promotion of Research and Innovation (FIFG) specifies that research
institutions must take care that their research results are available for the
public. They also must support analysis and utilisation of research work. 
To
ensure greater transparency and cooperation in the area of research policy, the
ARAMIS information system for government research (“Ressortforschung”) makes
information on research projects and assessments contracted or conducted by the
federal administration accessible to the general public and project managers.
The Federal Statistical Office (FSO) and the State Secretariat for Education,
Research and Innovation (SERI) are able to use this detailed information for
statistical and other assessment purposes.
Swiss
universities, the Swiss Confederation, cantons with universities and the
federal bodies responsible for education policy are cooperating, through the
SWITCH Foundation, to promote optical fibre interconnection of universities,
universal login procedures, the digital repositories library and applications
of e-identity to academia.
The
Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) fosters cooperation among researchers
by using it as an evaluation criterion. Furthermore, it provides instruments
explicitly requiring cooperation, notably the interdisciplinary instruments
National Centres of Competence in Research (NCCR) and National Research
Programmes (NRP). Most of the budget of the Commission for Technology and
Innovation (CTI) is devoted to projects promoting cooperative research between
higher education institutions and private companies, especially those without
their own research capacity, essentially small and medium enterprises (SMEs).
As of 2013, Swiss companies received additional long-term support for
innovative activities when national thematic networks (NTNs), innovation
mentors (IMs) and physical and web-based platforms for Knowledge and Technology
Transfer (KTT platforms) were introduced. NTNs help establish contacts between
businesses and public research institutes. Following a multi-stage assessment
procedure in 2012, eight national thematic networks were recognised by the CTI:
‘Carbon Composites Switzerland’, ‘Inartis’, Inno-vative Surfaces’, ‘Swiss
Biotech’, ‘Swiss Food Research’, ‘Swiss Wood Innovation Network’,
‘Swissphotonics’ and ‘Logistics Network Association’.
b.
Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research
services
The
SWITCH foundation is the Swiss partner in the Géant Project and is connected to
a number of important international internet organisations where there are
particularly close links with DANTE, which operates the European research
network. Furthermore, the Swiss National Grid Association SwiNG collaborates
with the European Grid Initiative (EGI) . This collaboration is also reflected
by the participation of SwiNG in the FP7 project  „EGI-InSPIRE“.

 Federated electronic identities

Switzerland
participates in the STORK 2.0 project that aims to take further steps for wider
uptake of eID in Europe.
Turkey 
Priority: More effective national
systems

 Research and Innovation structure

The
most important change in the political context and the Research and Innovation
(R&I) structure is the establishment of Ministry of Science, Innovation and
Technology (MoSIT) which replaces the existing Ministry of Industry and Trade
(MoIT) with a decree law published in the Official Gazette on 3 June 2011. The
science, technology and innovation-related duties of the MoSIT are defined as
the development, implementation and coordination of the S&T and innovation
policies, and the promotion of the R&D and innovation projects, activities
and investments. All main actors in the system, including the Scientific and
Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and the Turkish Academy of
Science, are connected to the MoSIT. The Turkish Patent Institute (TPE), the
National Metrology Institute (UME), the Turkish Accreditation Agency
(TURKAK),the Turkish Academy of Science (TUBA) and the Turkish Standards
Institute (TSE) which are government institutions related to R&D polices,
are also affiliated to the MoSIT[19].
The
recent amendment promulgated in TUBITAKs legislation[20] in July 2012, aims to increase the
functionality of TUBITAK in commercialization of R&D output in TUBITAK’s
research centres. Moreover, the amendments aim also at supporting venture
capital funds[21].

 National strategy for R&I

The
National Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy 2011-2016 adopted in
December 2010 by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology (BTYK) focuses
on human resources development for science, technology and innovation,
transformation of research outputs into products and services and enhancing
interdisciplinary research, highlighting the role of SMEs, R&D
infrastructures and international cooperation[22].
Furthermore,
the new decisions taken on the 24th BTYK held in August 2012  focus
on increasing the quality of primary and secondary education, restructuring of
abroad graduate scholarship programmes,  of university entrance system and on
the preparation towards participation to Horizon 2020. Furthermore, two
additional decisions related to the previous ones were taken, namely the
establishment of a coordination committee for integrity, harmonization and
target orientation in R&D, innovation and entrepreneurship support
mechanisms and improvement of public procurements to support innovativeness.
The new decisions of the 25th BTYK are focused mainly on the e-government
related issues. Furthermore, health becomes a priority area in S&T policies[23].

 R&I funding 

Between
2000 and 2011, Turkey's total gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) has increased
by more than 10 times on TL basis reaching €4,535m (TL11,154m) in 2011
according to the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). In 2010, GERD was
€4,657.08 (TL9,267m). GERD/GDP ratio which is around 0.85 in 2010-2011. One of
the reasons is Turkey's is the higher GDP growth rate. The average GDP growth
rate between the last two years (2011-2012) is 8.85%. In order to increase the
GERD/GDP, the growth rate of GERD should be higher than the GDP growth rate.
Also, another reason is that the increase in GDP is not correlated with an
increase in GERD.. In Turkey, higher education institutions (HEIs) still have
higher share in performing R&D. 46% of R&D is done by HEIs in Turkey 
The
government earmarked an amount of €1.2b[24]
(TL2.8b) for funding R&D in 2013[25].The
2023 national R&D targets were set  during the 23rd BTYK meeting held  on
the  27th of  December 2011 . The main R&D objective for 2023 is
to reach the 3 % of GDP which is set by the Lisbon/Barcelona objectives.
Moreover, the goal for the business R&D expenditures is to increase 2% of
GDP. The target for the FTE researchers is to increase their number to 300,000
and for to private sector, to 180,000.
In
2011, 45.8% of R&D expenditures were funded by business enterprises, 29.2%
by government sector, 20.8% by higher education sector, 3.4% by other national
sources and 0.7% by foreign funds[26].

 Competitive funding through calls
     for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

Turkish
STI Policy and instruments have been recently reformed in order to reach
national economic and social targets and gain competitiveness at international
arena. Existing implementation mechanisms are being revised and new tools are
being developed in order to increase the knowledge production and utilization
capacity of Turkish Research Area (TRA) in general terms. Mainly Turkish STI
policy aims to strengthen the institutional and legal structure of National
Innovation System (NIS) to achieve its well-functioning as the initial step of
the reform process in Turkey. A more competitive and performance based approach
is built upon those attempts. In this vein, research funding modalities are
also being revised in order to increase efficiency of the funding allocated to
research and to utilize research results for social and technological problems
Turkey faces. 

  Project-based funding in the
      country

Both
institutional and project-based funding is available for universities and
public R&D centres. For project-based funding, universities and public
R&D centers apply to the programmes carried out by the Scientific and Technological
Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK).
These programmes finance ‘bottom-up’/ ‘free funding’ projects. Nearly half of
the state funding is allocated for competitive programmes. In 2011, nearly 37%
of the state budget for R&D was allocated to project-based subsidies, while
25% was earmarked for public research institutes and 38% was allocated for
universities (BTYK 23, 2011).

  Use
      of core principles of international peer review

For
the assessment of the projects TUBITAK uses external experts. The main
selection criteria include the quality of the scientific, technological and
economic aspects of the project; quality of the project planning, and quality
of the applicant. External national experts are appointed for the assessment of
the projects. With similar selection criteria, KOSGEB applicants are assessed
by external experts together with experts from KOSGEB[27]. 

 Institutional
     funding based on institutional assessment

In
this respect, there is a shift to competitive, target based, thematic approach
in funding research. Traditionally TÜBİTAK follows a bottom up model in
funding research; research groups who meet the criteria receive funding. Within
competitive approach, new Research and Innovation funding programmes are
launched; those are mission-oriented, thematic ones targeted to produce
solutions to specific social and technological problems. They are opened in
some prioritized topics such as electrical vehicles, mechatronics, energy
storage, solar energy, coal technologies, underground water, erosion, and
desertification. Competitive approach aims to fund the best research groups in
those thematic, mission oriented, newly launched programmes. Funding goes to
groups offering best methodologies and solutions as identified in the call
topic. Those targeted calls also aim to enhance/realize coordination among
previously funded R&D projects in Turkey. 
Participation
of international experts to evaluation panels is both legally and practically
open and perceived as critical to assess the international competitiveness and
novelty of the research and innovation projects. Peer reviews for allocating
project-based funding may be carried out by national and/or international experts.
TÜBİTAK can base funding decisions on the results of international peer
review carried out by other organisations and those carried out under the
responsibility of organizations other than hers. Thus international peer review
process is both legally and practically accepted in the organization. Mostly
the international peer review results are accepted while allocating national
funds to ERA-NET projects, projects funded under JPIs and international S&T
agreements. TÜBİTAK handles engagement of international experts as
processes helping to carry towards internationalization and promotion of
excellence at international standards. It helps to reach internationally
accepted research norms, values, quality and it is deemed highly important for
improving excellence in TRA. 
For
a more effective NIS, TÜBİTAK is planning a monitoring and impact
assessment process concerning national research programmes. Those initiatives
are directed towards elaborating and understanding the main results, output and
in a broader perspective the impact of the research and innovation projects
funded nationally. Impact assessment studies are designed to provide feedback
for revising the existing mechanisms and devising new tools and policies for
better results. Thus, it is believed to increase the efficiency of allocation
of R&D funds.  
Priority: Transnational Cooperation

 Implement joint research agendas

Framework
Programmes (FPs) appear as the main tool for international cooperation in
S&T. Turkey makes huge investments and efforts to make TRA actors exploit
the benefits proposed by FPs such as networking, knowledge and technology
transfer, joint innovation activities, access to new markets, etc. Other than
FPs, TÜBİTAK carries out project based bilateral cooperation with 28 organizations
from 24 countries, and it is in cooperation with 90 global and regional
organizations through specific S&T agreements by the end of 2013.[28]
Moreover,
between the years 2007-2012 TÜBİTAK participated in total 41 ERA-NETs in
which 107 Turkish institutions participated through around 15.6 Million €. In
2012, 7.4 Million € are spent through bilateral cooperation and ERA-NETs which
makes approximately 0.12% of R&D expenditure realized in 2012. Turkey
participates in 9 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) except Cultural Heritage
JPI. Turkey also participates to Article 185 initiatives namely; Eurostars and
EMPIR on European research on metrology in FP7 and its participation continues
under Horizon 2020.[29] 
Strategic
Research Agendas SRAs are implemented jointly with JPI partners and joint
research priorities are built within ERA-NETs and Article 185 initiatives.
Common funding and evaluation principles applied in ERA-NET, JPIs and Article
185 initiatives together with partner countries add on further enhancement of
cooperation among researchers from applicant countries.
Turkey
is represented in European Research Area Committee (ERAC) and its subcommitees
as High Level Group for Joint Programming (GPC), Strategic Forum for
International cooperation (SFIC), Knowledge Transfer Group, Steering Group For
Human Resources and Mobility (SGHRM).
Besides,
COST and EUREKA are critical tools for international cooperation in STI.
Turkish research actors participate to 194 ongoing COST[30] actions and have 44 EUREKA projects and Turkey
ranked as 4th most successful country out of 32 countries in EUREKA
due to the statistics by the end of 2013. Turkey also participated to other
cooperation programmes and activities like European Space Agency (ESA),
European Molecular Biology Conference (EMBC), Black Sea Economic Cooperation,
NATO, OECD, etc.
FPs
and other international cooperation activities have the potential to contribute
to structural reform process. Possibility to share best practices, enable
policy learning, learn new methodologies in funding and evaluation processes.
ERA-NETs and JPIs provide a valuable basis for programme and policy level
coordination and learning. Thus, TÜBİTAK attach importance to those kind
of collaboration possibilities especially with European partners. 
Priority: Research Infrastructures

 Financial
     commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national,
     regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Research
Infrastructures gradually gained weight in Turkish STI Policy agenda parallel
to the encompassing reform process in recent years. Strategy of funding and
developing Research Infrastructures (RIs) is mainly dealt with Development
Plans. 
During
the Nineth Development Plan period from 2007-2013, a 2.4 billion TL (around 1
billion €) is spent for development of research infrastructures in universities
and public bodies in priority technology areas identified by the above
mentioned Development Plan and Supreme Council for Science and Technology.
Currently there are 108 research infrastructures activated, 65 thematic RIs are
being developed, and 97 advanced research center projects are underway. Those
research centers are mainly on the areas of materials science, life sciences
including biotechnology, aviation and space, information and communication
technologies, defence industry and nanotechnology. On the other hand, research
center laboratories are accomplished in 20 universities and in 62 university
laboratories are being developed in order to enhance research capacity of
universities.[31] 
Ministry
of Development is working on ESFRI Roadmap in order to build linkage between
nationally funded Research Infrastructures and the platform. There is also an
on-going preparation for ERIC regulation in Turkey. 
Under
the Research Infrastructures scheme of the 7th Framework Programme
(FP7) 38 projects are funded from which Turkish partners could get 8.8 million
€ 300 researchers from Turkey could get access to leading European research
infrastructures and 12 research institutes did get 10.9 million € direct
infrastructure and capacity building support under Research Potential (RegPot)
Programme.[32] 
Priority: Open labour markets for
researchers

 Open, transparent and merit based
     recruitment of researchers

According
to the Council of Higher Education (HEC) regulations, all open research
positions in public universities must be announced on the website of the
universities at least 15 days prior to the application deadline[33].
TÜBITAK
is the EURAXESS Network coordinator in Turkey. Interested researchers can find
online information[34]
regarding accommodation, day care and schooling, intellectual property rights,
language courses, recognition of qualifications, salaries and taxation, social
and cultural aspects, social security, pension rights and healthcare, visas and
work permits[35].
Although
Charter and Code (C&C) is not binding for Turkey, in the light of
integration with Europe, C&C principles are applied in most of the
institutionalized research organizations in their recruitment process. 
A
new legal arrangement is realized to enable foreign researchers or experts to
easily come, get residence permit and work in Turkey for certain periods of
time for projects funded under European Union Programmes. This special
residence permit rescues researchers from red tape to apply for a work permit
and facilitates the process for researchers coming to Turkey in EU funded
projects including Framework Programmes.
To
support brain gain, TÜBİTAK also put in use new research funding and
fellowship programmes similar to Marie Curie funds. This national programme is
specially targeted to Turkish researchers in USA, Japan, Canada and other
countries and became very successful in bringing these researchers to TRA, thus
ERA. Under this programme “2232-Brain (Incoming Research Fellowships for
Turkish Citizens) additional financial support provided to researchers besides
their salaries for 4 years, those returned to Turkey from abroad.   
TÜBİTAK
also launched a new process with universities, academic organizations and
leading industrial organizations to attract researchers from USA, Canada and
Japan. Leading Research institutes in Turkey are negotiated to create job
opportunities for qualified Turkish researchers in those developed countries.
TÜBİTAK demands those kinds of job advertisements in every three months
and shares job opportunities with the targeted researchers. Currently an online
platform is being prepared to widely distribute those kinds of job
opportunities to a wider community. Platform will be finalized at the end of
this year. It will greatly enhance the brain gain process for TRA.   
In
order to strengthen quantitatively and qualitatively the human potential in
research and technology in Turkey, the Scientific and Technological Research
Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) encourages researchers worldwide to come and
visit the Turkish Research Area. 
To
achieve the aim of making Turkey more attractive for top researchers,
TÜBİTAK provides various fellowships as well as coordinating the
dissemination of EU Framework Programmes funds. Moreover, Research Performing
Organizations including, Universities, Research Institutes and Industrial
Organizations located in Turkey provides special research positions only for
the researchers having international research experience.  
This
website, giving information about the “National and European Funding
Mechanisms”, presents attractive research vacancies for researchers, living and
conducting active research abroad,  who wish to be integrated into the Turkish
Research Area, to spend his/her sabbatical in Turkey, to spend the summer in
Turkey,  or to collaborate with Turkish Research Area. 
With
the help of this online platform, researchers looking for a position or a
fellowship will reap the benefit of being able to find them in a proper portal
as well as the Research Performing Organizations will take advantage of this
website, by publishing vacancies for the specific research group who has
international research experience.
In
FP7 Marie Curie Programme 293 project could get 38.9 million € from Turkey.
Those projects helped to build career perspectives for researchers, enhance
their intellectual capabilities and international visibilities. Through FPs,
international agreements or brain circulation activities, internationalization
in R&D is perceived as a profound process to enhance national STI
capabilities, reach to global knowledge and provide access to networks and
follow up latest technological developments. Internationalization in STI mostly
with Europe attached great importance to reach national economic and social
objectives in mid to long term.[36] 


 Researchers careers

According
to TURKSTAT (2012), 58% of researchers are employed in universities, 33% in the
private sector and 9% in government.[37].
Turkey
has bilateral social security agreements with 21 countries. Citizens of
countries which have signed social security agreement with Turkey based on the
principle of reciprocity can certify that they are subject to insurance in
their own country[38].

 Cross-border access to and
     portability of national grants

In
the past, foreign researchers conducting projects funded by TÜBITAK were at a
disadvantage compared to Turkish researchers, as they were not entitled to
obtain the ‘Project Incentive Bonus’. The relevant regulation was recently
amended[39].

 Support mobility between private
     and public sector

The
support schemes for incoming; outgoing and reintegration fellows are
coordinated in TÜBİTAK by BİDEB (The Science Fellowships and Grant
Programmes Department). BİDEB implemented more than 25 science fellowships
and grant schemes for research careers. Nearly half of these Programmes are
national grants for Turkish citizens. Within these programmes, undergraduate,
graduate and postdoctoral studies of the researchers and scientific events are
supported by TÜBİTAK. 
Priority: Gender balance and gender
contents in research
National
policies do not address specifically the gender equality in research.
Therefore, there are no direct support programmes for the gender equality, nor
a special set of rules for regulating the working conditions of female
researchers.
Priority: Knowledge circulation

 Open access for publications and
     data resulting from publicly funded research

Turkish Academy network and Information Center
(ULAKBİM) under TÜBİTAK aims to build research and education networks
among research organizations and universities, and enable linkage of those
institutes with their national and international counterparts. It aims to
provide information technologies support as well as necessary documentary
services including access to knowledge to foster production of scientific
knowledge in Turkey. TÜBİTAK provides digital services as scientific
publications repository, research data repository  and computing services. Some
of the scientific publications provided by TÜBİTAK is available online and
free of charge and the institution also makes research data online and free of
charge. 
ULAKNET 
The Turkish Academic Network and Information Centre
(ULAKBİM) was founded as a R&D Facility Institute in 1996.
ULAKBİM’s main objectives have been set as operating a high speed computer
network enabling interaction within the institutional elements of the national
innovation system, and providing information technology support and information
services to help scientific production. ULAKBIM consists of National Academic
Network (ULAKNET) Unit, which undertakes the task of formation and operation of
research and education network infrastructure in Turkey. The number of users of
ULAKNET has reached to approximately 3 million in 2012.[40]
Cahit
Arf Information Center (CABİM)
Cahit Arf Information Center provides information
and document delivery services nationwide, using traditional and electronic
means, in order to meet the information needs of academia, public and
industrial sectors, and to contribute to the production of scientific
information in Turkey. In 2012, approximately 125.000 people benefitted from
the services of the Center.[41]
To create equal opportunity of access to academic
information resources for researchers within Turkey, TÜBİTAK EKUAL
(Electronic Resources National Academic Licence) Project is implemented in the
center. Within this project 17.739 electronic journals are accessed from
databases together with 51 million bibliographical records and 1.2 million
conference proceedings etc.[42] 
Turkish National e-Science e-Infrastructure (TRUBA)
Turkish National e-Science e-Infrastructure (TRUBA)
Strengthening Project mainly aims to meet the needs of researchers who carry
out the studies in Turkey, ongoing national and international projects on high
performance computing, distributed computing and scientific data warehouse. The
project is the continuation of the developed project TR-Grid Research
e-Infrastructure Strengthening (TR-Grid ReIS). During this project,
administrative and technical motivation which was generated in TR-Grid ReIS
project will be maintained increasingly and TRUBA computing and storage
resources for national researchers will be increased to be equivalent as
resources available at few centers in Europe. In 2010, this e-infrastructure
provided services to 78 different public institutions.[43] 

 Open innovation (OI) and knowledge
     transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

In
2012, TÜBİTAK launched a programme[44]
which offers grants of up to 1 million TL per year to universities to encourage
them to establish new Technology Transfer Offices (TTO) and to develop existing
ones. The programme aims to facilitate collaboration between universities and
industrial enterprises and allow industry to benefit from new information-based
technologies. The TTOs supported under the programme receive a grant of up to 1
million TL per year from TÜBİTAK. Based on results of yearly evaluations,
the support period can be extended up to 10 years. The scope of the grant
covers personnel expenses, transportation, subsistence and accommodation costs,
tools, equipment, software, purchase of publications, service fees, meetings,
presentations and organisational expenses, certified financial consultancy
fees, and general expenses.
ERA
Progress Report 2014 SERBIA 
Priority:
More effective national systems

 Research
     and Innovation structure

The Serbian
research system consists of three operational levels. The first level of
governance and the highest legislative authority is the Serbian National
Parliament. The Committee for Science and Technological Development (Nacionalni
komitet za naučni I tehnološki razvoj) is in charge of proposing laws that
regulate the area of science, technology and innovation. At the ministerial
level, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development
(Ministarstvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja - MESTD) governs the
functioning and development of science and technology in Serbia.  
The National
Agency for the Regional Development (NARD) and Innovation Fund (IF) of the
Republic of Serbia are to a limited extent also relevant innovation policy institutions,
although their main activities are in funding innovation activities on the
operational level. 
Policy
formulation and implementation institutions include the National Council for
Science and Technological Development (NCS) and the National Council of Higher
Education (NCHE) which are the highest advisory bodies in their respective
fields.
The
operational level consists of intermediary and funding organisations. Research
performers are private and public research organisations in the government,
higher education and the business enterprise sector. R&D organisations in
the public sector form a block which comprises seven public universities with
78 faculties, the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts with its 10 scientific
institutes, 28 other scientific institutes, a centre of scientific excellence,
30 research institutes, 65 innovative organisations, five business associations
for support of innovation and 107 registered innovators. It also includes
scientific and technical infrastructure that encompasses: the academic
intranet, a gene bank, an accelerator, libraries of the institutes and
faculties, the University Library and the National Library of Serbia, which
boasts the KoBSON network that provides access to scientific and technological
information worldwide. R&D organisations in the private sector include
seven private universities with 45 faculties, research resources of foreign
companies in Serbia and research and innovation resources of domestic firms. 
The Science
Law as well as the Innovation Law in the Republic of Serbia defined MESTD as
the main and the only governing institution in the country, responsible for
R&D and Innovation activities. Research governance was transferred to the
level of Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (APV) to a limited extent, as it was
defined by the law on the regulation of jurisdictions of the APV, adopted by
the Parliament of the Republic of Serbia on November 30, 2009. According to
this regulation, the creation of the Strategy for technological development of
the APV must be harmonized with the national S&T strategy. Additionally,
(co)funding for establishment of high-tech installation, building homes for
young scientists, and for international S&T cooperation, as well as
(co)funding of R&D activities was regulated. The law introduced a
definition and enabled funding of programmes important for APV in the area of
S&T and regulated the establishment of the innovation fund based on local
revenues, as well as establishment of local R&D centres and popularization
of S&T activities. Finally, the law directed financial support to the
Academy of Sciences and Arts of the APV. 

 National
     strategy for R&I

The Strategy
for Scientific and Technological Development 2010-2015 is the key policy
document which provides a vision of scientific and technological development
for the Republic of Serbia by defining four main points: focus, partnership,
innovation and investments. Measures for implementation of the Strategy are
specified in the corresponding action plan. The main framework of the strategy
encompasses focus and cooperation, thus with these two main topics the
government wants to regulate S&T nation focus and priority areas and
encourage cooperation on the national and international level in different
aspects (i.e. universities, knowledge transfers, industry-academia
collaboration, joint research endeavours, etc.). The restructuring of the
public R&D system together with harmonised efforts toward recognition and
integration of the business R&D sector into the national innovation system
is a key objective of government strategy for S&T development in the
Republic of Serbia until 2015.
Another
important document for the scientific and technological development is the
Strategy for Higher Education 2020. Additionally, a new Strategy for Scientific
and Technological Development for the period 2016-2020 titled “Research for
Innovation 2020” is in preparation.

 R&I
     funding

The
Government budget appropriations or an outlay for research and development
(GBAORD) as a share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was 0.34 per cent in 2013.
This percentage has increased to 0.5 per cent through additional investment of
credit funds in infrastructure and scientific and research equipment, donations
and IPA funds. The ambitious 2015 target, set by the Strategy, to reach a 1.05
per cent of GDP will not be achieved. The adjusted 2015 target is 0.56 per cent
of GDP.
The Serbian
budget allocations for science grew significantly, from the sum of €28m in
2001, to about €100m in 2008 and 2009. During that eight-year period, there was
a substantial growth in salaries of researchers, and almost €30m were invested
in capital equipment for scientific research work (SSTDRS, 2010). The Project
of Infrastructural Investments, worth EUR 400 million started in January 2010
and will last until the end of 2015 (SSTDRS, 2010). According to the data
provided by the national statistical office, in 2011 the share of higher
education sector expenditures for Research and Development (HERD) was 56.71 per
cent of GERD (24.14 per cent in EU27), much higher than the BERD share (9.38
per cent) of GERD (62.07 per cent in EU27). Governmental expenditure for
R&D was 33.77 per cent (12.81 per cent in EU27), whereas the private
non-profit (PNP) sector amounted to 0.13 per cent, a negligible share of GERD
in the same year (0.99 per cent in the EU27).
Despite the
economic crisis, the overall public R&D expenditure in Serbia has been
increasing over the past years. The biggest jump was seen in 2011 when the
budgetary allocations increased by 22 per cent in comparison with 2010,
following the government obligations which are the research infrastructure
through financial agreements with the European Investment Bank and the Council
of Europe Development Bank with a total value of €305m to be implemented in
2010-2015. 
Investments in R&D and innovation in Serbia from public
sources are prioritised and budgeted in the framework of multi-annual plans.
Project financing is based on open competition for R&D and Innovation
projects. There is no institutional, or block funding for R&D activities in
Serbia.
The main challenge for funding research in Serbia in 2014
is increasing the R&D and innovation activity in the business enterprise
sector (BES). Official figures show that BERD share in GERD in 2012 was only
24.97 per cent, which is very low compared to the EU average of 62.96. R&D
activities in the Higher Education Sector are mostly financed from the
government budget (69.51 per cent in 2012), with a small share from the
industry (only 2.51 per cent) and surprisingly small share of financing from
abroad (3.12 per cent in 2012 compared to 11.27 per cent in 2008). The
private-non-profit sector makes the smallest contribution to R&D and was
estimated to be 0.06 per cent in 2012. 

 Competitive
     funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of
     international peer review

On the country
level, there is no official information about the budget allocations of the
MESTD budget. According to the yearly reports of the MESTD half of the budget share
in 2009 was allocated to basic research and a 39.1 per cent was spent on
applied research. Small proportions of 5.1 per cent and 5.3 per cent were
distributed to developing human resources in science and international
cooperation. Data for the more recent years are not yet available. 

  Project-based
      funding in the country

Investments in
R&D and innovation in Serbia from public sources are prioritised and
budgeted in the framework of multi-annual plans to ensure predictability and
long-term impact. Project financing based on open competition for R&D and
Innovation projects is decade’s long practice in Serbia. There is no
institutional, or block funding for R&D activities in Serbia. Programmes
for the support of R&D and innovation activities co-financed by the MESTD,
the Ministry of Economy and Regional Development (MFE) and the National Agency
for the Regional Development (NARD) are not sector-specific.
The
allocation of public research funding is competitive and implemented through
open calls for proposals (project-based funding). Independent experts, two
international and one domestic for each proposal, carry out evaluation of
research proposals. Peer review is based on transparent evaluation criteria
communicated in advance including adherence to international principles,
research team competence, excellence, impact, quality and efficiency of the
project implementation.
The adoption
of the national R&D strategy brought several changes in budgetary
commitments. A new grant programme for interdisciplinary and integral research
has been introduced, taking up almost a third of national R&D financing
addressed to realisation of the R&D and Innovation projects. The programme
is designed to bring together teams from different institutions in addressing
Serbia’s R&D priorities. 

  Use
      of core principles of international peer review

There
is no official data collected and calculated for GBAORD figures in Serbia. Figures
used in different publications are estimations and calculations of experts and
authors of different publications and reports. Calculations are based on the
data provided by the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. For 2011
GBAORD as  per cent of GDP was 0.493 (EU average is 0.73), which is less than
in 2009 (estimated 0.578 in ERAWATCH Country Reports 2012: Serbia, Kutlaca,
2014).

 Institutional
     funding based on institutional assessment

There was no
significant funding for innovation activities in Serbia from any source other
than MESTD, MFE and NARD. Additional to this, there is neither institutional
nor block funding for R&D activities in Serbia. Public universities have
the access to institutional funding but only for teaching and not for R&D
activities. 
In 2011
financial scheme for supporting the Innovation fund activities was negotiated
with the World Bank, the European Investment Bank, and the European Commission.
Preliminary negotiations were estimated at a total sum of €75.5m for the period
2011-2014. Initial funding is provided through the Innovation Serbia Project
with €8.4m (Component 2: Support Human Capital Development and Research) and it
is funded by the EU pre-accession funds (IPA) allocated for Serbia in 2011, and
implemented with expert support of the World Bank. The IPA project will provide
funding for capacity building of the Innovation Fund and implementation of
financial instruments supporting enterprise innovation (MINI GRANTS and
MATCHING GRANTS Programmes) by the Innovation Fund. Public call for MINI GRANTS
programme has been launched in December 5th, 2011. Public call for the MATCHING
GRANTS programme is launched in spring 2012. The aims of the Innovation fund of
Republic of Serbia include development of innovative enterprises, creation and
development of innovation system in Serbia, which is of key significance in
gaining competitiveness of the economic sector, and contributions to the
overall awareness of the role of technological development and innovation.
Programmes for
the support of R&D and innovation activities co-financed by the MESTD, the
Ministry of Finance and Economy (MFE) and the National Agency for the Regional
Development (NARD) are not sector-specific.
In
the area of institutional assessment, two independent bodies are carrying out
the evaluation procedures such as initial accreditation, re-accreditation and
thematic evaluations. These are the Commission for Accreditation and Quality
Assurance (CAQA), which is a member of ENQA (European Association for Quality
Assurance in Higher Education), and the Commission for Accreditation of
Research Institutions.
Priority:
Transnational Cooperation
The
most important instrument of transnational cooperation in the previous period
was the Framework Program. Serbia has had the status of an associated country
since 2007. Researchers from Serbia have achieved significant
results in FP7 calls for
proposals and, according to the latest statistics,
participated in 317 projects of which 49 were SME grants. Achieved success rate was 15.2
per cent, which is lower than the EU average, but higher than in
many of the countries in the Western Balkan (WB) region.
Serbia
expressed interest for association to Horizon 2020 and signed the Agreement
with the European Union on July 1, 2014. Serbia
participated in several ERA-NET Initiatives and is active in ERA
governance bodies and in the FP Programme Committees. 
Serbia participates in international
large-scale research programmes and infrastructures, such as European
Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN). Serbian research groups are currently
active in four CERN collaborations. 
Serbia conducts international
cooperation through bilateral and multilateral programs such as COST, EUREKA,
NATO, etc. At the moment more than 400 experienced
and young Serbian researchers participate in over 170 COST actions in 10
Domains. There are 16 active Eureka projects, and so far
Serbian researchers have participated in 84 Eureka projects
overall, involving 172 organizations.
Related to the NATO-SPS program, Serbian researchers are involved in 22 running
projects.
Related to the regional initiatives,
Serbia has actively participated in the design of a Regional Strategy aiming at
strengthening R&I cooperation at regional level with its Balkan neighbours.

Serbia has signed bilateral agreements
for scientific cooperation with almost all WB countries and other EU countries.
Serbian researchers are involved in 228 bilateral projects with 10 countries. 

 Implement
     joint research agendas

The Serbian Ministry has recognised the
need and is working towards ensuring an adequate supply of human resources for
research and an open, attractive and competitive labour market for male and
female researchers. 

  Joint
      research

Bilateral cooperation is implemented with a number of countries
including Germany, Hungary, France, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Switzerland
and Italy. In 2011 a call for S&T cooperation was launched with number of
countries such as Spain, Portugal, Greece (new cycle), China, India, Croatia,
Switzerland. Additional to that, framework agreements were drawn up with
several other countries such as Austria, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Spain,
Russia, and the USA.

  FRAMEWORK
      PROGRAMME

                                                             
i.     
Joint programming initiatives 
Serbia
participates in several international programmes, including 11 Framework
Programme Seventh projects, COST, Eureka, NATO Science for Peace and Security
and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
                                                           
ii.     
ERA-Nets
Serbia
participates in six ERA-nets, two of which are currently active. Serbia is a
partner on ERA-CAPS: ERA-NET for Coordinating Action in Plant Sciences, started
in 2011 with expected end in November 2014, and SAFERA: Coordination of
European Research on Industrial Safety towards Smart and Sustainable Growth,
from 2012 to 2015. 
The
network that ended include EUPHRESCO: European Phytosanitary Research
Coordination II (2011-2014), SEE-ERA.NET: South East European ERA-NET
(2004-2009), SEE-ERA.NET Plus: South East European ERA-NET Plus – joint call
for European Research projects in September 2009 in order to enhance the
integration of the Western Balkan countries into the European Research Area
(2009-20013), and SEERA-EI: South East European Research Area for
eInfrastructures (2009-2012). 

 INTEROPERABILITY,
     MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF EVALUATION RESULTS AND OTHER SCHEMES

Serbia
recognised the need to create and improve evaluation standards and principles
as this was identified as one among the key challenges R&D and Innovation
system. The instruments and mechanisms were also described as obsolete, making
the internal system less credible. Work has been done with that regard. The
accreditation procedure is obligatory for R&D, HE and registered innovation
organisation: under the HE Law, for teaching competence: under the Science Law,
for R&D competence; under the Innovation Law for innovation capacity. 
Orientation on
foreign programmes and projects (EU, WB, OECD, etc.) for support of innovation
activities in the Republic of Serbia is acknowledged by the domestic governing
institutions, but there is still work to be invested in harmonising the
national innovation performance, priorities, needs and challenges with goals
and activities of these international projects. 
Priority:
Research Infrastructures
Serbia is a member of ESFRI and
participates in two ERICs. In order to provide a strategic approach and policy
support, it is planned to define a national Roadmap on Research Infrastructures
as a part of IPA2013 project "Support to Innovation and Technology
Transfer in Serbia" which also includes development of the National
Strategy “Research for Innovation 2020''. Through landing operations with EIB
and CEB, Serbia has initiated significant investments in scientific equipment
and infrastructure in support of R&I activities, such as the formation of
Science and Technology Parks in university centres, establishment of Centres of
Excellence, support for the Centre for talented pre-university students in
Petnica, and the Centre for the Promotion of Science.
Under the Science and Innovation Law
(2010), all research institutions in Serbia are obliged to acquire an
accreditation. This requirement was set in order to improve the quality and
excellence of knowledge production. The accreditation process is mandatory
requirement for all organizations, institutions and companies that intended to
apply for government support for R&D activities. 
Serbia has 2 centres
of excellence. The Centre for Mathematical Research of Nonlinear Phenomena is a
research unit at the Department of Mathematics and Informatics, at the Faculty
of Science, University of Novi Sad. The other one is the Centre for Solid State
Physics and New Materials of the Institute of Physics Belgrade. Centres of
excellence have for it main aim to act as disseminators of excellence in their surroundings
and to contribute to the development of society and economy in Serbia. The
future development should see opening of several new centres of excellence, as
well as the creation and support of excellent research institutions engaged in
effective public-private cooperation and partnerships, which will form the core
of research and innovation 'clusters'.
One of the great
challenges for Serbia is working towards the full utilisation of the research
as well as full connectedness of the research and development with the social
surroundings. The aims to that end are to have the Universities and research
institutions embedded in the social and economic life where they are based,
while competing and cooperating across Europe and beyond.
Another structural
challenge that Serbian R&D and innovation landscape faces is the
undeveloped infrastructure for innovative entrepreneurship and lack of culture
for technological entrepreneurship in the higher education sector and public
R&D laboratories and institutes (PRO – Public Research Organisations).
Crucial steps forward in order to create an environment to support
technological entrepreneurship are the changes in HE Law and Innovation Law
that will stimulate and legally approve creation of university and PROs spin-offs.
There are just few examples of spin-offs initiatives, such as within University
of Novi Sad - Faculty of Technical Sciences and Mihajlo Pupin Institute in
Belgrade. Until 2010 there are two only Technology Transfer Offices established
in Serbia, one at the University of Novi Sad and the other at University of
Belgrade. Since then, University of Niš opened a Centre for Technology Transfer
to help in commercialisation of the research results, and University of
Kragujevac developed a Centre for Knowledge Transfer with an overall objective
to identify, protect and exploit intellectual gains of the science community.
There are several science and technology parks that are in different projecting
and development phases (such as the ones in Zvezdara, Zemun, Inđija.
Vršac).
Overall assessment is
that most of the private HE institutions are so-called “teaching”
faculties/universities, with transmission of knowledge (teaching) as primary
and only activity. Other two main missions: generation of new knowledge (research)
and the 'third mission' (contribution to local or regional wealth and economic
development) are mostly present in some of public HE institutions (ERA Serbia
report, p.22).
9.      Financial
commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional
Research infrastructures of pan-European interest
MESTD
announced a plan for other investments in R&D in Serbia in the period
2010-2015. The main sources of financing of the infrastructural projects which
demonstrate and enable development of priority research fields in the next five
years will be international financial institutions, and particularly the
European Investment Bank, European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, the
World Bank, Development Bank of the Council of Europe and various international
donors, specifically EU pre-accession funds. 
The Project of
infrastructural investments, worth €400m started in January 2011 and will last
until the end of 2015. Projects selected for this investment were those
conducive to the development of priority disciplines, likely to ensure
successful development and identification of scientific talent, prevent brain
drain, and finally, projects which will make up for almost twenty years of
scarce investment into scientific infrastructure. Main projects within the
“Serbian R&D infrastructure investment initiative” are (SSTDRS, 2010): 
·        
Serbian R&D infrastructure investment
initiative comprises investments in upgrading existing capacities, for
adaptation of existing buildings and laboratories and new capital equipment for
research (app. €70m); 
·        
Development of Excellence centre and academic
research centres (app. €60m); 
·        
Development of ICT infrastructure, for Campus
for faculties of technical sciences of the University in Belgrade and
Infrastructure for supercomputing initiative "Blue Danube" (app. €30m
to €80m); 
·        
Creation of a knowledge-based economy through
the construction of science parks in Belgrade, Novi Sad, Nis and Kragujevac
(app. €30m); 
·        
Basic infrastructure projects, such as apartment
buildings for researchers in Belgrade, Novi Sad, Nis and Kragujevac (app.
€80m). 
a.      Participation
in the development and operation of EIROs
Serbia
has an industrial relations country profile on EIROnline database (http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/country/serbia_1.htm). 

b.      Participation
in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the
ESFRI Roadmap
Serbia
has signed a Memorandum of Understanding in 2006 for DARIAH – Digital
Infrastructure to Study Materials in Cultural Heritage Institutions. 
c.       Participation
in ERICs
Serbia
is a part of CERIC-ERIC. The specific scope of this ERIC concerns the offer as an integrated
service to external researchers of the access to synchrotron light and
other microscopic probes for analytical and modification techniques notably
for materials preparation and characterization, structural investigations and
imaging in Life Sciences, Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Cultural Heritage,
Environment and Materials Sciences and to their various technological and
industrial outcomes ranging from energy to biomedical and of interest to most
manufacturing industries.

 Access
     to Research Infrastructures of pan-European interest

There
is no specific regulation to facilitate the integration of foreign researchers
in the national research labour market, such as social security access, health
insurance, compatibility of pension schemes, etc. 
Priority:
Open labour markets for researchers
In
2014 the number of researchers full time equivalent (FTE) in relation to the
total number of employees was 5.4 per 1000, while the number of new doctoral
graduates is 0,19 per 1000 inhabitants.
From the legislative point of view,
labour market in Serbia is open and recruitment process is transparent. In
practice, open positions are often not published in a centralized way, but
rather in local newspapers or institutional web sites in Serbian language.
Serbian EURAXESS job portal is fully operational and ready to accept open
positions data. 
Five
research and higher education institutions have signed the Declaration of
Commitment to the Principles of the Researchers Charter and Code, out of which
one was granted with the European Commission logo for the ‘HR Excellence in
Research’.
National grants and fellowships for
researchers and PhD students are not open to non-residents. National funded
grants or fellowships are not portable to other countries. However, there are
special calls dedicated to foreign nationals. In 2013, the Ministry for
Education, Science and Technological Development granted 29 scholarships for
foreign postdoctoral students and support for 120 students and professors for
international inter-university collaboration. In order to accelerate the
acceptance of foreign researchers the procedure for faster recognition of
foreign diploma or training qualifications has been implemented.
In 2013 MESTD funded participation of
4,177 young researchers in national projects, and additionally provided 596
scholarships for doctoral training programmes. 
A great challenge for the Serbian
scientific community is the extensive brain drain and ageing of research
population. This issue in placed highly on the agenda and it is planned for the
new Strategy to tackle these problems.
Priority:
Gender balance and gender contents in research
Serbia made a significant step toward
improving the status of women. A set of legal and policy documents was adopted:
Law on Gender Equality
(adopted 11th December 2009), National Strategy
for Improved Status of Women and Gender Equality Promotion (adopted 13th
February 2009) and the Action Plan for Implementation of the National Strategy for Improved Status of Women and Gender Equality
Promotion, for the period 2010-2015 (adopted on 26th August 2010).
In 2008 the Gender Equality Directorate
is established within the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Republic
of Serbia. Directorate provided trainings to the
employees in civil service for the implementation
of gender equality principle into programs,
plans and operation of state institutions as
well as program development and training for
media representatives. Additionally, Directorate implemented various projects topics relevant for gender equality (the
combat against sexual and gender-based
violence, Project inception, Programme for
implementation of NAP priority activities).
Moreover, Directorate is involved in analysis of the gender dimensions of textbooks (from primary school to university),
organizing conferences and debates on issues
of gender equality, support the collection and
presentation of gender analysis.
There are no special regulations for
career breaks (i.e. parental leave) and this applies for any sector not only
R&D. Restoration of the same position is guaranteed by the law and a
fixed-term contract must be extended due to maternity leave. 
Priority:
Knowledge circulation
The Serbian Government encourages Open
Access (OA) to the results of publicly funded research. Leading R&D actors
support the principle of OA described in the Berlin Declaration, e.g.
University of Belgrade has signed the Berlin Declaration in November 2011. 
Serbia has
an active scientific publishing environment. Most of 400 active national
professional journals have accepted OA as the publishing model. Full texts are
available from Digital Repository of National Library of Serbia, where digital
forms of all issues are deposited. Eight data repositories exist in
Serbia, containing 10,200 deposited items, out of which 2,503 have OA.
The new Law on Higher Education,
currently in the adoption process, will stipulate mandatory OA to all PhD
theses promoted in Serbian universities. Several universities already have such
repositories, such as Digital Archive of the University of Belgrade, PHAIDRA.
Regarding
knowledge transfer between public and private sector, MESTD supports the
creation and development of new small and medium-sized innovative companies,
business incubators, science and technology parks, centers for technology
transfer, organization for the encouragement of innovation activities in the
priority areas of science and technology, research and development centres,
innovation centres and technology companies. 
Legal
framework for innovation activities in Serbia is provided by the Law on
Innovation Activity (Official Gazette RS, no 110/05, 18/10 and 55/13) and
bylaws. The law regulates framework for formation of organizations for support
of innovation activities and technology transfer centers. By this Law the
Register of Innovative Companies was established, as well as the Innovation
Fund. The main goal of the Innovation Fund is to encourage innovations and the
provision of funding for innovation activities, primarily through cooperation
with international financial institutions, organizations, donors and private
sector. Currently, the Fund is implementing IPA 2011 Innovation Serbia project.
A new IPA 2013 - Support for Innovation and Technology Transfer in Serbia
project is under preparation. 
Additionally,
during the last 10 years, MESTD has been supporting The Best
Technological Innovation Competition, in cooperation with the University of
Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, the
Intellectual Property Office of the Republic of Serbia, and the national Public
TV broadcasting company.
In
the area of intellectual property rights MESTD, in cooperation with the
Intellectual Property Office, prepares and sends to the Government draft
legislation on intellectual property rights, or suggested by-laws in this area.
The Government has approved Strategy of the Intellectual Property
Development for the period of 2011 to 2015 with the corresponding action plan.
The
most developed public e-infrastructure in Serbia is Serbian NREN (AMRES), which
operates as a separate legal entity since 2010. The network infrastructure is
fully integrated into the GEANT network, complying with the GEANT architecture
and common services (such as eduroam). At the policy level AMRES, has, in 2014,
developed Membership Agreement and Technical Service Agreement providing well
defined framework for further collaboration with clear definition of
obligations and responsibilities of all parties. 
AMRES
is responsible for development and operation of identity federation at the
national level, which is already identified as one of the basic infrastructure
for advanced digital services including further e-Science services. The
existing AMRES infrastructure already supports eduroam federation with 41
connected institutions as Identity Providers (the biggest universities and
faculties). 
The most popular digital research service is KoBSON,
which provides free academic access to scientific journals. It provides access to more than 35.000 scientific journals, 90.000
electronic books and its available 24/7. Also, on KoBSON website users can find links to books and
journals from OA services like: DOAB (1614 titles), DOAJ (9967 journals), OAPEN books, FreeBooks4Doctors, CLC Disease Management Project
etc.
The work on Web SSO (Single Sign-On) federation is
continued through GEANT project and eduGAIN activity. Two institutions are
included in the local pilot project, while establishing a national policy is
the next priority on the roadmap of integration into pan-European eduGAIN
federation. Promotion and establishing of digital identities in individual
institutions, acting as Identity providers, and its inclusion into identity
federation is an ongoing activity.
[1] The Research Fund, the
Infrastructure Fund and the Strategic Research Programme fall under the
auspices of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture while the Technology
Development Fund is administered by the Ministry of Industries and Innovation. 
[2] The
2014 level of spending on R&D is 2,7% of GDP. 
[3]
http://eng.velferdarraduneyti.is/media/acrobat-enskar_sidur/Act-on-equal-status-and-equal-rights-of-women-and-men_no-10-2008.pdf
[4]
http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/MRN-pdf/Jafnretti-i-haskolum-a-Islandi.pdf
[5] http://www.norden.org/en/publications/publikationer/2013-544
[6] Eurostat (2012): http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/R_%26_D_expenditure 
[7]            UNINETT AS develops and operates
the Norwegian national research and education network, a high-capacity computer
network interconnecting about 200 Norwegian educational and research
institutions and more than 300 000 users, as well as giving them access to
international research networks.
[8] The Federal Departments are ‚super-ministries’ that encompass a
number of so-called Offices and State Secretaries. Offices and State Secretaries
are more like ministries in other countries.
[9] In 2013, the SNSF allocated slightly more than half (51%) of its
funds to its main funding scheme, project funding, see
http://www.snf.ch/SiteCollectionDocuments/por_fac_sta_kurz_jb13_e.pdf
[10] The acceptance of the mass immigration initiative on 9 February
2014 by Swiss voters has resulted in Switzerland being (temporarily) excluded
from European research funding and led to non-association in the European
research programme Horizon 2020. For the time being, Switzerland therefore has
third country status in Horizon 2020.
[11] The acceptance of the mass immigration initiative on 9 February
2014 by Swiss voters has put the Swiss-EU Bilateral Agreement on Free Movement
of Persons in question. The initative requires the re-introduction of fixed
quotas for immigrants, and thus a suspension of the Free Movement of Persons. 
[12] See footnote above 
[13] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/
services/researchPolicies
[14]   Available at: http://www.crus.ch/dms.php?id=6872, version of 17
January 2014.
[15] CTI Activity Report 2013, 
http://www.kti.admin.ch/dokumentation/00077/index.html?lang=en
[16] http://www.snf.ch/en/researchinFocus/nrp/nrp60-gender-equality/Pages/default.aspx
[17] http://www.nfp60.ch/E/Pages/home.aspx
[18] While the SNSF received numerous positive responses from the
research community with regard to its new publication funding model, it also
received more critical feedback, mainly from the humanities. The latter feared that
the new model would make it more difficult to have scientific books printed. In
addition, publishing houses in the humanities and social sciences felt that it
threatened their core task. As a result, the SNSF reviewed its new publication
funding model and adjusted it in certain points. It now envisages slightly
higher financial contributions for guaranteed publisher services and a pilot
project with the publishers. With the slightly increased grants and lump sums for
publications, the SNSF aims to accommodate the interests and needs of the
humanities:
[19]
Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012
http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr
[20]
http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files//mevzuat/yonetmelik/KANUN_278_temmuz-2012.pdf

[21]
Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012
http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr
[22]
Ibid.
[23]
Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012
http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr
[24]
€1=TL2.3363 (Central Bank of Turkey’s effective sale rate for 30.10.2012)
[25]
http://.www.tbmm.gov.tr/butce/2013/konusma_30_Ekim_2012.pdf
[26]
Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012
http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr
[27]
Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr
[28]
TÜBİTAK Database
[29]
TÜBİTAK Database
[30]
TÜBİTAK Database
[31]
10th Development Plan of Turkey (2014-2018), pp. 96, 97
[32]
TÜBİTAK Database
[33]
EURAXESS Turkey country profile
http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Turkey_Country_Profile_RR2013_FINAL.pdf
[34] http://euraxess.tubitak.gov.tr/euraxess-turkey
[35]
Ibid.
[36]
TÜBİTAK Database
[37]
EURAXESS Turkey country profile
http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Turkey_Country_Profile_RR2013_FINAL.pdf
[38]
Ibid.
[40]
ULAKBİM Activity Report 2012: http://ulakbim.tubitak.gov.tr/sites/images/faaliyet_oz_12.pdf, p.
1. 
[41]
ULAKBİM Activity Report 2012: http://ulakbim.tubitak.gov.tr/sites/images/faaliyet_oz_12.pdf, p.
7
[42]
Ibid., p. 8
[43]
Ibid., p. 1
[44]
http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/country_pages/tr/supportmeasure/support_0045?tab=template

Austria
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2473.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 10 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 294.2 || EUR 178.6 || 5 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 7 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.6 % || 1.4 % || 8 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 27 % ||   || 6 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 73 % ||   || 4 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.7 % ||   || 5 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Austria ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 65609 || 2545544 || 10 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 15.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 5 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 8.6 % || 24.2 % || 12 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 29 % || 33.2 % || 21 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 41.8 % || 47 % || 24 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 16.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 7 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.3 || 2.89 || 19 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 8 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 15 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.022 || 0.02 || 5 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Austria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Austria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 21.1 % || 21 || 39.6 % || 85.7 % || 12 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 51.1 % || 11 || 45.0 % || 10.6 % || 20 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 27.8 % || 5 || 15.4 % || 3.7 % || 7 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Belgium
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2489.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 9 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 224.4 || EUR 178.6 || 9 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 12 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.2 % || 1.4 % || 14 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 9.9 % ||   || 1 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Belgium ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 63207 || 2545544 || 11 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 8 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 21 % || 24.2 % || 4 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 33.5 % || 33.2 % || 16 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 43.8 % || 47 % || 23 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 12 % || 20 % (EU27) || 14 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 12.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 13 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.4 || 2.89 || 6 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.8 || 0.45 || 3 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 8 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.020 || 0.02 || 8 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Belgium || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Belgium || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 24.1 % || 18 || 39.6 % || 87.9 % || 9 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 55.2 % || 8 || 45.0 % || 11.4 % || 19 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 20.7 % || 9 || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || 20 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Bulgaria
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 101.1 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 25 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 13.8 || EUR 178.6 || 28 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 26 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % ||   || 12 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Bulgaria ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 14794 || 2545544 || 21 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 4.4 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 27 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 3.8 % || 24.2 % || 17 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 49.1 % || 33.2 % || 3 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 51.7 % || 47 % || 7 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || 3 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 14.4 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 9 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.2 || 2.89 || 21 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 7 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 20 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 21 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Bulgaria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Bulgaria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 39.0 % || 13 || 39.6 % || 59.6 % || 17 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 51.2 % || 10 || 45.0 % || 37.7 % || 11 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 9.8 % || 22 || 15.4 % || 2.8 % || 9 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Croatia
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 318.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 18 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 74.5 || EUR 178.6 || 19 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 10 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.6 % || 1.4 % || 7 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 1.5 % ||   || 18 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Croatia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 11454 || 2545544 || 23 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 6.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 23 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.4 % || 24.2 % || 19 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 47.3 % || 33.2 % || 4 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 54.6 % || 47 % || 5 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || 3 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 15.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 8 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.7 || 2.89 || 4 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 15 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 16 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.004 || 0.02 || 17 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Croatia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Croatia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 53.5 % || 3 || 39.6 % || 32.1 % || 25 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 34.9 % || 25 || 45.0 % || 66.5 % || 4 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 11.6 % || 19 || 15.4 % || 1.4 % || 14 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Cyprus - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 69.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 26 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 81.0 || EUR 178.6 || 18 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 20 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.9 % || 1.4 % || 21 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % ||   || 12 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Cyprus ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 1937 || 2545544 || 26 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 4.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 26 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.7 % || 24.2 % || 22 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.9 % || 33.2 % || 12 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.0 % || 47 % || 12 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 11 % || 20 % (EU27) || 15 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 12.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 12 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.0 || 2.89 || 3 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.2 || 0.45 || 1 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 1 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.004 || 0.02 || 18 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Cyprus || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Cyprus || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 18.2 % || 23 || 39.6 % || 8.0 % || 27 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 45.5 % || 17 || 45.0 % || 90.2 % || 2 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 36.4 % || 2 || 15.4 % || 1.8 % || 12 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Czech Republic - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1039.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 14 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 99.0 || EUR 178.6 || 16 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 11 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 10 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.03 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 52.4 % ||   || 1 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 53 % ||   || 1 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 47.6 % ||   || 9 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 47 % ||   || 6 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.9 % ||   || 7 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Czech Republic ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 45902 || 2545544 || 14 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 8.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 19 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 4.1 % || 24.2 % || 16 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 28.2 % || 33.2 % || 22 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 41.4 % || 47 % || 25 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 13 % || 20 % (EU27) || 13 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 16.9 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 6 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 12 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 13 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 18 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.003 || 0.02 || 19 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Czech Republic || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Czech Republic || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 34.8 % || 16 || 39.6 % || 46.9 % || 21 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.1 % || 20 || 45.0 % || 43.8 % || 6 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 26.1 % || 7 || 15.4 % || 9.3 % || 3 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Denmark
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2517.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 8 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 451.1 || EUR 178.6 || 2 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 1.0 % || 0.7 % || 2 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.7 % || 1.4 % || 5 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.12 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.2 % ||   || 16 
Source: Eurostat
and OECD
 Researchers || Denmark ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 56771 || 2545544 || 13 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 19.4 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 2 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 17.8 % || 24.2 % || 9 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 33.1 % || 33.2 % || 17 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 45.3 % || 47 % || 20 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 15 % || 20 % (EU27) || 11 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 14.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 10 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.6 || 2.89 || 14 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 11 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 10 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.020 || 0.02 || 9 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Denmark || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Denmark || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 16.0 % || 25 || 39.6 % || 71.4 % || 15 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 56.0 % || 7 || 45.0 % || 28.2 % || 12 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 28.0 % || 4 || 15.4 % || 0.3 % || 23 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Estonia
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 145.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 23 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 109.3 || EUR 178.6 || 15 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 6 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.1 % || 1.4 % || 1 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.1 % ||   || 17 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Estonia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 7646 || 2545544 || 24 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 13 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 4.1 % || 24.2 % || 16 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 43.7 % || 33.2 % || 7 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.5 % || 47 % || 10 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 21.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 5 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.8 || 2.89 || 22 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 14 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 22 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.006 || 0.02 || 15 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Estonia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Estonia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 20.0 % || 22 || 39.6 % || 88.1 % || 8 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 66.7 % || 2 || 45.0 % || 10.0 % || 21 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 13.3 % || 16 || 15.4 % || 1.9 % || 11 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Finland
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2064.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 11 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 382.2 || EUR 178.6 || 3 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 1.1 % || 0.7 % || 1 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.9 % || 1.4 % || 4 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.6 % ||   || 9 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Finland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 57549 || 2545544 || 12 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 21.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 1 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 6.8 % || 24.2 % || 14 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 32.1 % || 33.2 % || 19 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.9 % || 47 % || 8 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 24 % || 20 % (EU27) || 4 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 25.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 2 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.4 || 2.89 || 17 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 17 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 12 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.027 || 0.02 || 4 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Finland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Finland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 44.4 % || 7 || 39.6 % || 77.3 % || 14 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 38.9 % || 22 || 45.0 % || 21.5 % || 14 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 16.7 % || 12 || 15.4 % || 1.2 % || 15 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

France - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 15134.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 2 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 231.7 || EUR 178.6 || 8 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 9 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.3 % || 1.4 % || 12 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. ||   || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || France ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 338761 || 2545544 || 3 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.9 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 11 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 35.4 % || 24.2 % || 1 
Source:
Eurostat
   || France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 25.6 % || 33.2 % || 25 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 47 % || 0 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 19 % || 20 % (EU27) || 9 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 6.5 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 19 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 13 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 20 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 7 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.021 || 0.02 || 6 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || France || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || France || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 40.9 % || 10 || 39.6 % || 91.0 % || 5 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 48.5 % || 13 || 45.0 % || 8.1 % || 24 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 10.6 % || 20 || 15.4 % || 1.0 % || 19 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Germany
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 24034.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 1 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 293.7 || EUR 178.6 || 6 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 4 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.0 % || 1.4 % || 2 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 36 % ||   || 3 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 37.3 % ||   || 2 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 64.7 % ||   || 7 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 63.7 % ||   || 4 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.3 % ||   || 6 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Germany ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 520561 || 2545544 || 1 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 12.3 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 9 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 11.2 % || 24.2 % || 11 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 26.7 % || 33.2 % || 24 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 45.4 % || 47 % || 19 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 15 % || 20 % (EU27) || 11 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 11.7 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 15 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.4 || 2.89 || 18 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 24 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 9 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.036 || 0.02 || 1 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Germany || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Germany || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 65.9 % || 1 || 39.6 % || 90.3 % || 6 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 26.8 % || 27 || 45.0 % || 8.6 % || 23 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 7.3 % || 23 || 15.4 % || 1.1 % || 17 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Greece - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 731.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 16 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 65.8 || EUR 178.6 || 20 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 21 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 31.4 % ||   || 4 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 37.3 % ||   || 3 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 68.6 % ||   || 6 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 62.7 % ||   || 5 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 6.2 % ||   || 2 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Greece ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 45239 || 2545544 || 15 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 18 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || n.a. % || 24.2 % || 0 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.7 % || 33.2 % || 13 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 43.9 % || 47 % || 22 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 10 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 10 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 14 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 22 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Greece || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Greece || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 30.0 % || 17 || 39.6 % || 46.7 % || 22 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 60.0 % || 4 || 45.0 % || 53.2 % || 5 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 10.0 % || 21 || 15.4 % || 0.2 % || 25 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Hungary
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 337.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 17 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 34.0 || EUR 178.6 || 25 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 24 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.1 % ||   || 11 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Hungary ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36945 || 2545544 || 16 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 8.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 20 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.7 % || 24.2 % || 18 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 31.7 % || 33.2 % || 20 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 46.5 % || 47 % || 17 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 21 % || 20 % (EU27) || 7 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 8.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 17 
Source: Eurostat
and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.2 || 2.89 || 20 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 16 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 17 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.007 || 0.02 || 14 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Hungary || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Hungary || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 22.7 % || 19 || 39.6 % || 54.0 % || 20 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 59.1 % || 6 || 45.0 % || 40.3 % || 8 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 18.2 % || 11 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 4 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Ireland
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 760.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 15 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 165.9 || EUR 178.6 || 11 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.5 % || 0.7 % || 18 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 19 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 37.3 % ||   || 2 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 62.7 % ||   || 8 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.4 % ||   || 14 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Ireland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 22131 || 2545544 || 19 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 10.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 14 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.5 % || 24.2 % || 6 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 32.4 % || 33.2 % || 18 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 49.2 % || 47 % || 14 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.5 || 2.89 || 5 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.8 || 0.45 || 4 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 6 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.016 || 0.02 || 10 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Ireland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Ireland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 42.9 % || 8 || 39.6 % || 92.5 % || 3 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 42.9 % || 18 || 45.0 % || 6.4 % || 26 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.3 % || 14 || 15.4 % || 1.2 % || 16 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Italy - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 8822.3 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 4 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 145.1 || EUR 178.6 || 13 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 16 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 17 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. ||   || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Italy ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 151597 || 2545544 || 5 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 6.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 24 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 8.4 % || 24.2 % || 13 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 34.9 % || 33.2 % || 15 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 53.2 % || 47 % || 6 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 23.4 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 3 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.5 || 2.89 || 2 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 5 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 5 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.021 || 0.02 || 7 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Italy || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Italy || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 46.2 % || 6 || 39.6 % || 84.9 % || 13 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.7 % || 19 || 45.0 % || 14.5 % || 15 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.1 % || 15 || 15.4 % || 0.6 % || 22 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Latvia - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 32.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 27 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 16.1 || EUR 178.6 || 26 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.1 % || 0.7 % || 28 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.4 % || 1.4 % || 26 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 6.1 % ||   || 3 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Latvia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 7377 || 2545544 || 25 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 7.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 21 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 0.2 % || 24.2 % || 24 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 53.3 % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 59.9 % || 47 % || 1 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 32 % || 20 % (EU27) || 2 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 22.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 4 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.9 || 2.89 || 27 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 26 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 25 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 24 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Latvia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Latvia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 21.4 % || 20 || 39.6 % || 56.6 % || 19 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 64.3 % || 3 || 45.0 % || 37.8 % || 10 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.3 % || 14 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 5 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Lithuania
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 119.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 24 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 39.8 || EUR 178.6 || 23 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 22 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.0 % || 1.4 % || 20 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.6 % ||   || 20 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Lithuania ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 17358 || 2545544 || 20 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.7 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 12 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 0 % || 24.2 % || 25 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 52.1 % || 33.2 % || 2 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 57.0 % || 47 % || 2 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 14 % || 20 % (EU27) || 12 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 11.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 14 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.1 || 2.89 || 25 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 27 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 26 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 27 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Lithuania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Lithuania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 53.8 % || 2 || 39.6 % || 87.0 % || 11 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 46.2 % || 16 || 45.0 % || 13.0 % || 17 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || 0 || 15.4 % || n.a. % || 0 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Luxembourg
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 282.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 21 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 538.3 || EUR 178.6 || 1 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 13 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 11 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 6.5 % ||   || 9 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 5.8 % ||   || 6 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 93.5 % ||   || 1 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 94.2 % ||   || 1 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.9 % ||   || 19 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Luxembourg ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 3267 || 2545544 || 28 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 6 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.3 % || 24.2 % || 7 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24 % || 33.2 % || 27 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.9 % || 47 % || 9 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 9 % || 20 % (EU27) || 16 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 0.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 20 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 2.89 || 0 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 0.45 || 0 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 0.45 || 0 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || n.a. || 0.02 || 0 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Luxembourg || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Luxembourg || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || 5 || 39.6 % || 94.8 % || 2 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 50.0 % || 12 || 45.0 % || 5.2 % || 27 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || 0 || 15.4 % || n.a. % || 0 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Malta - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 20.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 28 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 48.9 || EUR 178.6 || 22 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 25 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 24 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.4 % ||   || 21 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Malta ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 1273 || 2545544 || 27 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 7.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 22 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.4 % || 24.2 % || 23 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 26.9 % || 33.2 % || 23 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 47 % || 0 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.4 || 2.89 || 24 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 18 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 27 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.005 || 0.02 || 16 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Malta || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Malta || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || n.a. % || 0 || 39.6 % || n.a. % || 0 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 33.3 % || 26 || 45.0 % || 99.3 % || 1 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 66.7 % || 1 || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || 21 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Netherlands
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 4664.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 6 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 278.8 || EUR 178.6 || 7 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 8 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 9 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.12 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 29.2 % ||   || 5 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 29.2 % ||   || 4 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 70.7 % ||   || 5 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 70.7 % ||   || 3 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.9 % ||   || 13 
Source: Eurostat
and OECD
 Researchers || Netherlands ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 82991 || 2545544 || 8 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 16 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.9 % || 24.2 % || 5 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24.1 % || 33.2 % || 26 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 44.9 % || 47 % || 21 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 13 % || 20 % (EU27) || 13 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 13.6 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 11 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.7 || 2.89 || 1 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.9 || 0.45 || 2 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 2 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.030 || 0.02 || 3 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Netherlands || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Netherlands || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || 5 || 39.6 % || 88.2 % || 7 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 46.9 % || 15 || 45.0 % || 11.7 % || 18 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 3.1 % || 25 || 15.4 % || 0.1 % || 26 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Poland - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1370.1 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 13 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 35.6 || EUR 178.6 || 24 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 23 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.9 % || 1.4 % || 22 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.00 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % ||   || 12 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Poland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 100723 || 2545544 || 6 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 5.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 25 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.9 % || 24.2 % || 21 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 38.6 % || 33.2 % || 10 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 53.2 % || 47 % || 6 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.6 || 2.89 || 15 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 23 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 19 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.003 || 0.02 || 20 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Poland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Poland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 35.2 % || 15 || 39.6 % || 69.9 % || 16 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 59.3 % || 5 || 45.0 % || 27.7 % || 13 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 5.6 % || 24 || 15.4 % || 2.4 % || 10 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Portugal
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1555.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 12 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 147.5 || EUR 178.6 || 12 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 3 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.0 % || 1.4 % || 3 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 23.5 % ||   || 7 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 22 % ||   || 5 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 76.5 % ||   || 3 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 78 % ||   || 2 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.2 % ||   || 16 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Portugal ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 100435 || 2545544 || 7 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 18.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 3 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 12 % || 24.2 % || 10 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 46.4 % || 33.2 % || 5 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 56.3 % || 47 % || 3 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 22 % || 20 % (EU27) || 6 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 7.3 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 18 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.0 || 2.89 || 26 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 25 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 23 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 26 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Portugal || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Portugal || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 40.7 % || 11 || 39.6 % || 87.9 % || 10 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.0 % || 21 || 45.0 % || 8.7 % || 22 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 20.3 % || 10 || 15.4 % || 3.5 % || 8 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Romania
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 290.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 20 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 14.5 || EUR 178.6 || 27 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.2 % || 0.7 % || 27 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.6 % || 1.4 % || 25 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. ||   || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Romania ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 25489 || 2545544 || 17 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 2.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 28 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.1 % || 24.2 % || 20 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 46.1 % || 33.2 % || 6 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 55.3 % || 47 % || 4 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 36 % || 20 % (EU27) || 1 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 8.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 17 
Source: Eurostat
and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 11 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 9 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 21 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 25 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Romania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Romania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 35.6 % || 14 || 39.6 % || 43.7 % || 23 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 37.8 % || 23 || 45.0 % || 14.5 % || 16 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 26.7 % || 6 || 15.4 % || 41.8 % || 1 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Slovakia
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 294.7 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 19 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 54.5 || EUR 178.6 || 21 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 19 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 18 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.4 % ||   || 10 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Slovakia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24711 || 2545544 || 18 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 17 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.4 % || 24.2 % || 23 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 42.6 % || 33.2 % || 8 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.7 % || 47 % || 14 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 23 % || 20 % (EU27) || 5 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 9.1 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 16 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.7 || 2.89 || 23 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 19 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 24 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 23 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Slovakia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Slovakia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 16.7 % || 24 || 39.6 % || 40.6 % || 24 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 54.2 % || 9 || 45.0 % || 41.2 % || 7 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 29.2 % || 3 || 15.4 % || 18.2 % || 2 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Slovenia
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 190.0 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 22 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 92.4 || EUR 178.6 || 17 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.5 % || 0.7 % || 17 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 16 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.14 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 21.3 % ||   || 8 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 78.7 % ||   || 2 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.3 % ||   || 15 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Slovenia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 12514 || 2545544 || 22 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 12.3 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 10 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 6.4 % || 24.2 % || 15 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.4 % || 33.2 % || 14 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.4 % || 47 % || 11 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 9 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 12 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 11 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.011 || 0.02 || 12 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Slovenia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Slovenia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 15.8 % || 26 || 39.6 % || 13.9 % || 26 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 68.4 % || 1 || 45.0 % || 80.5 % || 3 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 15.8 % || 13 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 6 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Spain - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 6185.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 5 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 132.1 || EUR 178.6 || 14 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 14 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.3 % || 1.4 % || 13 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.8 % ||   || 8 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Spain ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 220254 || 2545544 || 4 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 15 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 18 % || 24.2 % || 8 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 38.7 % || 33.2 % || 9 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.6 % || 47 % || 15 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.5 || 2.89 || 16 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 22 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 13 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.009 || 0.02 || 13 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Spain || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Spain || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 39.5 % || 12 || 39.6 % || 59.2 % || 18 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 48.4 % || 14 || 45.0 % || 39.0 % || 9 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 12.1 % || 18 || 15.4 % || 1.8 % || 13 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Sweden - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 3581.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 7 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 377.7 || EUR 178.6 || 4 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 5 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.7 % || 1.4 % || 6 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.3 % ||   || 6 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Sweden ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 80039 || 2545544 || 9 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 16.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 4 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 22 % || 24.2 % || 3 
Source:
Eurostat
   || Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 37.2 % || 33.2 % || 0 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.4 % || 47 % || 16 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 26.9 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 1 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.3 || 2.89 || 7 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 6 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 3 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.036 || 0.02 || 2 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || Sweden || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Sweden || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 41.7 % || 9 || 39.6 % || 95.8 % || 1 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 33.3 % || 26 || 45.0 % || 4.0 % || 28 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 25.0 % || 8 || 15.4 % || 0.2 % || 24 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

United Kingdom - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 11040.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 3 
 GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 173.9 || EUR 178.6 || 10 
 GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 15 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.2 % || 1.4 % || 15 
 Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.07 || n.a. || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. ||   || n.a. 
 Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.9 % ||   || 4 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || United Kingdom ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 429009 || 2545544 || 2 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 7 
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 30.7 % || 24.2 % || 2 
Source:
Eurostat
   || United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 37.7 % || 33.2 % || 11 
 Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 46.1 % || 47 % || 18 
 Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10 
 Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 8 
 Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 21 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 4 
 PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.013 || 0.02 || 11 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 2013 || United Kingdom || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || United Kingdom || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 51.3 % || 4 || 39.6 % || 91.8 % || 4 || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 35.9 % || 24 || 45.0 % || 7.1 % || 25 || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 12.8 % || 17 || 15.4 % || 1.0 % || 18 || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Iceland
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR 111.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR 348.6 || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || 1.1 % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || 2.2 % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Iceland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || 3350 || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 18.8 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 23.4 % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || 37.5 % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 52.5 % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 24 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 33.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || 2.4 || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.6 || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.5 || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || 0.008 || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Iceland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Iceland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 73.1 % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 50.0 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.9 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || n.a. || 15.4 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 201

Montenegro
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Montenegro ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) ||  % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || n.a. % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 0.0 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Montenegro || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Montenegro || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || n.a. % || n.a. || 39.6 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 100.0 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 100.0 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || n.a. || 15.4 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Norway - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR 3099.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR 621.7 || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || 1.8 % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Norway ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || 45578 || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 17.4 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 33 % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || 36.2 % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 48.1 % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 21 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 25.0 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || 2.5 || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.5 || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.4 || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || 0.016 || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Norway || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Norway || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 86.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 41.2 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 12.5 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 8.8 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Serbia - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Serbia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 7.1 % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || n.a. % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Serbia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Serbia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 28.9 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 71.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 63.2 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.7 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 7.9 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 1.6 % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Switzerland
- Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Switzerland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 49.3 % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 43.2 % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 8.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Switzerland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Switzerland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 52.2 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 89.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 30.4 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 4.7 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 17.4 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Turkey - Snapshot

 Public funding for Research || Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a. 
 GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a. 
 GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a. 
 GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a. 
 Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and OECD
 Researchers || Turkey ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a. 
 Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 5.2 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||   
 Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 3.2 % || 24.2 % ||   
Source:
Eurostat
   || Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Share of female researchers (2011) || 35.6 % || 33.2 % || 1 
 Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 46.5 % || 47 % ||   
 Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 28 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a. 
 Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 4.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a. 
Source:
Eurostat and She figures (2013)
 Outputs || Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States 
 Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a. 
 Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a. 
 PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a. 
Source: DG RTD,
Economic Analysis Unit
 || Turkey || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Turkey || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU 
   || Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted) 
 Cluster ERA compliant || 23.5 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 36.9 % || n.a. || 81.2 % 
 Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 52.9 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.0 % || n.a. || 16.8 % 
 Cluster ERA not applicable || 23.5 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 37.1 % || n.a. || 2.0 % 
Source: DG RTD,
ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014