Measuring progress in transnational coordination of research programming in Europe.
Date: 2015-08-19
Institutions: Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
Subjects: EU research policy, Framework Programme for Research and Development, cooperation policy, economic and social cohesion, film production, information network, information technology, research and development, research programme, research report

 Measuring progress in transnational   
 coordination of research programming in Europe

NETWATCH Policy Brief Series: No. 4

Karel Haegeman, Mathieu Doussineau, Mark Boden 

2 0 1 5

Report EUR 27164 EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
European Commission 
Joint Research Centre 

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies  

Contact information 
Address: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E-41092 Seville (Spain) 

E-mail: jrc-ipts-secretariat@ec.europa.eu 

Tel.: +34 954488318 

Fax: +34 954488300 

http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu 

http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu 

Legal notice 
This publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre, the European Commission’s in-house science service.  

It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy-making process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy 

position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the 

use which might be made of this publication. 

All images © European Union 2015. 

JRC90177 

EUR 27164 EN 

ISBN 978-92-79-47105-6 (pdf)  

ISSN 1831-9424 (online)  

doi:10.2791/953432 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015 

© European Union, 2015 

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

Abstract 

Cooperation in the EU between Member States and with Associated Countries on national public research programming has received a lot of 

attention in recent years, and will continue to do so under Europe 2020. This NETWATCH Policy Brief looks at the current policy context and 

rationales for transnational coordination of research programming, and aims to measure progress made so far in doing so. It looks both at 

coordination of public national research budgets and at cooperation between nations under the framework programmes, Horizon 2020 and 

Cohesion policy. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Measuring progress in 
transnational 
coordination of 
research 
programming in 
Europe 

Authors: 1Karel Haegeman, 1Mathieu 
Doussineau and 1Mark Boden 

1EC, JRC-IPTS, karel-herman.haegeman@ec.europa.eu;  
mathieu.doussineau@ec.europa.eu;  
mark.boden@ec.europa.eu 

2015 

EUR 27164 EN 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  Table of contents 

Summary                                                                                                                                                            4 

1. The role of programme cooperation in addressing societal challenges                                           5 

                   1.1 The European policy context for research addressing societal challenges                    5 

                   1.2 Setting Research and innovation priorities                                                                         7 

2. Transnational coordination of programmes and funds                                                                       9 

                   2.1 Volume and composition of programme cooperation in Europe                                    9   

                   2.2 National breakdown of programme cooperation                                                             9    

                   2.3 The volume of joint calls                                                                                                      12 

3.  Programme coordination under the Framework Programmes, Horizon 2020 and Cohesion 

Policy                                                                                                                                                           14   

                   3.1 National contributions to the total EU budget                                                                 14   

                   3.2 European Framework Programmes and Horizon 2020                                                   15   

                   3.3 Public national contributions complementing the EC contribution under FP7           16   

                   3.4 Cohesion Policy                                                                                                                      16 

4. Policy implications                                                                                                                                     18 

5. Acknowledgements                                                                                                                                   19 

6. References                                                                                                                                                   20 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  List of figures 

Figure 1.       Research priorities targeting societal challenges at different levels, and estimation of 
resulting priority societal challenges for the EU as a whole                                               7 

Figure 2.      National public funding to transnationally coordinated research for EU27 in 2010     10   

Figure 3.       Share of national public funding to transnationally coordinated research in total 

GBAORD in 2010 (including ESA contributions)                                                                  10 

Figure 4.       Relative contributions of EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland to the total 

annual transnationally coordinated public national research funding for 2010 
(excluding ESA contributions)                                                                                                11 

Figure 5.       Share of national public funding to transnationally coordinated research in total 

GBAORD in 2010 (excluding ESA contributions)                                                                 12 

Figure 6.       Total public funding per year for calls implemented by ERA-NET , ERA-NET Plus, JPIs 

(calls implemented by MS only) and ERA-NET Cofund under Horizon 2020 actions over 
the period 2004-2017 including currently planned calls [in mln Euro]                           13 

Figure 7.       National contribution per Member State and traditional own resources collected on 

behalf of the EU in 2012                                                                                                         14 

Figure 8.       Annual budget for the Framework Programmes and for Horizon 2020                         15 

Figure 9.       National contribution dedicated to public research centres (REC) and public 

universities (HES) complementing the EC contribution in the FP7                                   16 

Figure 10.     Relative share of Cohesion Policy funding assigned to R&D and innovation over     

time                                                                                                                                            17 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  Summary 

Cooperation  within  Europe,  among  EU  Member  States  and  also  with  Countries 
Associated to the Framework Programmes, on national public research programming has 
received much attention in recent years, and continues to do so under Horizon 2020. This 
NETWATCH Policy Brief looks at the current policy context and rationales for transnational 
coordination  of  research  programming,  and  aims  to  measure  progress  made  so  far  in 
doing so. It looks at coordination of public national research budgets and at cooperation 
between nations under both the seventh framework programme and Cohesion Policy. 

Keywords: transnational research programming, alignment, indicators, European 

Research Area, partnering instruments, Horizon 2020, Cohesion Policy. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  1. The role of programme cooperation in addressing societal 

challenges 

1.1  The  European  policy  context  for 
societal 

addressing 

research 
challenges 

regional)  R&D  and  innovation  systems  to 
foster excellence and smart specialisation’.  

The European Research Area  

The 

policy 

current 

context 

for 
programme  cooperation  largely  depends  on 
a  number  of  decisions  taken  at  European 
level  and  within  Member  States.  These 
include  the  Europe  2020  strategy,  the 
positions  of  the  European  Commission  and 
the  Council  on  the  state  and  the  future  of 
the  European  Research  Area,  and  the 
directions taken by Cohesion Policy. 

Europe 2020 

in 

solving 

Europe: 

The Europe 2020 strategy (European 
Commission,  2010)  assigns  two  key  roles  to 
research 
societal 
challenges1 and  increasing  competitiveness. 
As  the  European  research  landscape  is  still 
highly 
fragmented,  coordination  efforts 
continue  to  be  made  in  order  to  create 
identify  gaps  and  avoid 
critical  mass, 
unnecessary  duplication.  These  engage 
stakeholders  from  both  the  public  and  the 
private sectors in identifying and responding 
to 
transparent 
processes,  which  take 
into  account  the 
global  dimension.  In  addition,  Europe  2020 
points  at  two  other  aspects  relevant  to  this 
priority:  the  need  to  ‘reform  national  (and 

challenges 

societal 

in 

1 The  need  for  European  research  to  focus  on  the  Grand 
Challenges  of  our  time  and  moving  beyond  current  rigid 
thematic  approaches 
is  also  recognised  by  the  2009 
Declaration  of  The  Lund  Conference,  subscribed  to  by  350 
researchers, funders, business representatives and politicians 
at  the  Swedish  Presidency's  New  Worlds  New  Solutions 
conference  in  July  2009  and  acknowledged  by  the  Council 
ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/sweden/presidency/docs/lun
d-declaration_en.pdf 

5 

to 

the 

According 

Commission 
Communication  on  ‘A  Reinforced  European 
Research  Area  Partnership  for  Excellence 
and  Growth’  (European  Commission,  2012), 
the  optimisation  of 
(and 
international) programme cooperation has a 
threefold  objective,  at  member  state  level, 
at stakeholders level and at EC level: 

transnational 

•  Member  states  are  invited  to  step  up 
efforts  to 
joint  research 
implement 
agendas  addressing  grand  challenges 
(including  information  sharing,  strategic 
alignment  of  national 
funding  at 
European  level  and  common  ex  post 
evaluation),  ensure  mutual  recognition 
of 
to 
international peer-review standards as a 
basis for national funding decisions, and 
removal  of  legal  and  other  barriers  to 
interoperability  of 
the  cross-border 
(including 
programmes 
national 
cooperation  with  non-EU  countries 
where relevant). 

evaluations 

conform 

that 

organisations 

•  Stakeholder 
are 
encouraged 
to  agree  on  common 
funding  principles,  to  further  develop 
and  deploy  the  Lead-Agency,  Money-
Follows-Cooperation 
Line,  Money-
Follows-Researcher  and  other  models 
for cross-border cooperation and to pilot 
the  use  of  synchronised  calls  with, 
where possible, single joint international 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                        
peer review evaluation of proposals as a 
basis for funding decision. 

EU  countries  (both  Associated  States  and 
Third Countries). 

•  Meanwhile,  EC  is  engaged  to  pursue, 
stimulate and participate in Public-Public 
Partnerships to address grand challenges 
as  set  out  in  the  Communication  on 
Partnering in Research and innovation to 
leverage  Member  States'  contributions 
and  ensure  close  coordination  with 
relevant  activities  under  Horizon  2020, 
map  activities  in  agreed  priority  areas, 
with  a  view  to  identifying  strengths, 
weaknesses, gaps and duplications. 

In 

optimal 

essence, 

transnational 
cooperation and competition relate not only 
to  research  programme  coordination  and 
research 
infrastructure  cooperation,  as 
described  in  the  ERA  Communication  2012, 
but also to other types of cooperation, both 
in  research  and  in  innovation.  Examples 
include  institutional  cooperation  and  the 
creation of joint institutes (such as CERN2) or 
cooperation  between 
innovation  clusters 
and  aligning  cluster  policies  (e.g.  Europe 
Innova focusing on joint policy learning with 
regard to innovation clusters), thus widening 
the priority area not only to include research 
but also innovation. Complementing the ERA 
Communication  of  the  Commission,  the 
Council  of  the  European  Union  (2012) 
follows  this  line  by  stressing  the  ‘need  to 
and 
enable 
innovation  by 
fostering  and  exploiting 
synergies  between  national  programmes 
with international programmes’. Taking into 
account  these  aspects  this  priority  can  be 
understood  in  a  broad  sense  as  ‘optimal 
R&D 
transnational 
cooperation and competition’. Transnational 
cooperation  then  refers  to  cooperation 
between  EU  MS,  while 
international 
cooperation refers to cooperation with non-

transnational 

international 

research 

and 

2 European Organization for Nuclear Research 

6 

Synergies 

Based  on  the  need  to  address  Grand 
Challenges,  the  2012  ERA  Communication 
urges  Member  States  to  act  coherently  to 
achieve  the  scale  of  effort  and 
impact 
needed  to  address  these  grand  challenges 
limited  public  research  funds 
with  the 
available. 
reinforced 
and 
interoperability  between  national  research 
systems 
in  terms  of  strategic  agenda, 
research  infrastructures  but  also  processes 
are the backbone for “Optimal transnational 
co-operation  and  competition”.  A  target 
scale  of  effort  has  not  been  set,  but  the 
Communication  suggests  clearly  that  the 
currently scale is not sufficient for achieving 
impact. 

Cohesion Policy: Smart Specialisation as an 
ex-ante conditionality for ERDF funds 

Following  the  Communication  from 
‘Regional  Policy 
the  Commission  on 
contributing  to  smart  growth 
in  Europe 
2020’  (European  Commission,  2010a)  Smart 
Specialisation (S3) has been introduced as a 
framework  for  research  and 
innovation 
strategies.  This, 
in  synergy  with  other 
is 
instruments,  such  as  Horizon  2020, 
designed  to  pull  Europe  out  of  its  current 
economic  problems.  One  of  the  actions 
interregional 
pursued 
cooperation 
research  and 
innovation. This is an essential feature of the 
and 
Smart 
complements  prior  cooperation  initiatives 
(e.g.  FP7  Regions  of  Knowledge,  CIP  cluster 
initiatives, INTERREG IVC, etc.) and is gaining 
importance 
ERDF 
programme,  where  a  larger  part  of  the 
structural  funds  will  be  spent  on  research 
and  innovation  and  cooperation  with  other 
regions in and outside Europe. 

Specialisation 

to  promote 

fostering 

includes 

concept 

under 

new 

the 

 
                                                        
 
1.2  Setting Research and innovation 

priorities  

In  aiming  to  address  grand  challenges 
through  research  and  innovation,  two  key 
questions  arise:  who  decides  on 
the 
priorities that should receive public funding? 
And  which  priorities  get  most  funding? 
Obviously,  both  questions  are  connected  as 
priorities  in  public  R&D  are  normally  set  by 
those who spend the budget. As public R&D 
budgets in Europe are largely dispersed, the 
setting  of  priorities 
largely 
fragmented.  When  policies  aim  to  include 
more societal challenges in priority setting, it 
is  important  to  have  a  good  understanding 
of this fragmentation. Figure 1 below shows 
the  different 
levels  at  which  societal 
challenges  are  (sometimes  partially)  being 

also 

is 

used  to  set  public  priorities  in  research  and 
innovation.  Figure  1  gives  an  overview  of 
societal  challenges  targeted  at  European, 
national  and  regional  levels.  The  sum  of  all 
these  priorities  could  be  considered  as  the 
priorities for the EU as a whole, as set out in 
the far right hand column of Figure 1.  

In  practice,  priorities  for  Europe  may 
however  differ  from  this  list  of  summarised 
priorities for a number of reasons, including: 

•  Granularity: the summary does not take 
into  account  all  the  details  of  each 
priority at each level 

•  Weighting:  the final resulting  challenges 
depend  on  the  relative  weight  (the 
budget  allocated  to  it)  for  each  priority 
at each level. 

(cid:132)  Figure 1. Research priorities targeting societal challenges at different levels, and estimation of 

resulting priority societal challenges for the EU as a whole 

7 

 
 
 
 
•  Scope: 

in 

and 

national 

regional 
priorities  that  are  not  linked  to  Joint 
Programming  Initiatives  (JPI)  are  not 
this  overview.  The 
specified 
majority  of  the  budget  is,  however, 
decided on at these levels. The same 
goes  for  priorities  set  by  other 
organisations such as universities and 
public research organisations (PROs). 

In brief, Figure 1 illustrates that there 
are  many  actors 
involved  at  many 
different levels in setting R&I priorities in 
Europe,  and  in  deciding  which  societal 
challenges are to be tackled through R&I. 
Some  part  of  the  national/regional  R&D 
budget is not assigned to any priority per 
se,  and 
research 
performers  as  block  funding,  especially 
universities and research and technology 
organisations  (RTOs).  As  such,  those 
organisations may have more autonomy 
in  setting  their  own  priorities,  whether 
oriented 
societal 
challenges or not. 

is  allocated 

addressing 

to 

to 

The role of universities in priority setting 

seen 

In  the  European  policy  debate, 
to  have  an 
universities  are 
important  role 
in  addressing  societal 
challenges.  From  the  results  of  a  2011 
survey among rectors and vice-rectors of 
research-intensive universities in Europe, 
it can be noted that universities address 
a  wide  variety  of  challenges  related  the 
each  of  the  seven  flagship  initiatives  of 
Europe 2020. The flagship initiatives with 
the  most 
are 
innovation  and  climate,  energy  and 
mobility.  Also  challenges  related  to 
education, 
and 
employment  and  skills  are  mentioned 
quite  often.  Challenges 
to 
fighting poverty and to the digital society 

competitiveness 

challenges 

related 

related 

8 

as 

such 

values 

integration, 

less  often  mentioned.  Societal 
are 
challenges  mentioned 
that  do  not 
directly  relate  to  one  of  the  flagships 
include  health,  ageing,  and  other 
and 
challenges 
democracy, 
and 
globalisation. Some respondents pointed 
explicitly  at  reasons  for  not  addressing 
societal 
challenges  with  university 
research, such as: basic science does not 
need 
societal  problems; 
emphasis on societal problems is likely to 
focus  on 
harm  basic  research;  the 
over-
societal 
concentrating  research 
limited 
number of areas. 

risks 
in  a 

challenges 

solve 

to 

The role of research alliances in the 
development of transnational 
collaborations on specific research areas 

its 

launch 

than  250 

research  and 

technology 
Public 
organisations 
increasingly 
also 
collaborate  transnationally  in  research 
alliances. The European Energy Research 
instance,  groups 
Alliance  (EERA),  for 
research 
energy 
more 
organisations 
in-kind 
representing 
contributions  of  roughly  €600M.  The 
EERA  has  created  15  Joint  Programmes 
since 
in  2008,  with  the 
potential  to  engage  3500  full  time 
equivalents  (Witzanyová,  2014).  Other 
examples 
wide 
collaborations  between  public  research 
the  European 
include: 
organisations 
Climate  Research  Alliance  (ECRA);  the 
European  Transport  Research  Alliance 
(ETRA); 
for  Biomedical 
Research  in  Europe  (BioMed  Alliance); 
and  the  European  Research  Alliance  for 
liquid  metals  (LIMTECH).  The  JPI  Urban 
Europe  is  in  the  process  of  creating  an 
Urban Europe Research Alliance.  

the  Alliance 

European 

of 

 
 
(cid:132)  2. Transnational coordination of programmes and funds 

2.1  Volume and composition of 

programme cooperation in Europe 

- 

According  to  Eurostat  (R&D  budget 
coordinated 
transnationally 
statistics 
research,  2013),  transnational  coordination 
of  national 
funding  activities 
includes three categories:  

research 

•  Transnational  public  R&D  performers 
located  in  Europe.  Examples  are  CERN, 
ESO  and  JRC3.  The  programming  and 
performance  of  research  are  in  these 
cases integrated. 

•  Europe-wide  transnational  public  R&D 
programmes.  These  include  ERA-NETs, 
ERA-NETs  PLUS,  EUREKA,  COST,  ESA, 
185 
EFDA, 
Initiatives, and the public funding part of 
the  Joint  Technology  Initiatives  (ENIAC 
and ARTEMIS). 

EUROCORES, 

Article 

•  Bilateral  and  multilateral  public  R&D 
programmes 
between 
Member  State  governments  (and  with 
candidate countries and EFTA countries). 

established 

funding 

(or  €2.6  bn)  of  the  total 

As  shown  in  Figure  2,  2010  national 
public 
transnationally 
to 
coordinated research represents €3.5 bn for 
EU27  (or  €4.2  bn  for  EU28+NO+CH).  Three 
quarters 
is 
represented by national contributions to the 
European  Space  Agency  (ESA).  Joint  calls  by 
ERA-NETs,  ERA-NETs  Plus  and  Art.  187 
excluding  the  top-up  funding  of  the  EC 
represent  €0.26  bn  (10%  of  the  total 
national  contributions  to  the  ESA,  7.3%  of 

3 The  data  presented  here  do  not  include  the  national 
contributions  to  the  7th  Framework  Programme  which  come 
from the overall national contributions to the total EU budget 
(Eurostat, 2013). 

9 

the total transnationally coordinated budget 
in  2010,  and  0.28%  of  2010  GBAORD).  The 
remaining part of around €0.65 bn is divided 
over  all  the  rest  of  the  above  mentioned 
categories. 

2.2  National breakdown of programme 

cooperation 

towards 

Most  Member  States  are  involved  in 
some  form  of  research  coordination  at 
transnational  and  international  level,  but 
wide  differences  exist  both  in  absolute  and 
relative  terms.  The  proportion  of  2010 
GBAORD  (EU28,  Norway  and  Switzerland) 
directed 
transnationally 
coordinated  research  is  estimated  to  be  of 
4.27%  on  average  (based  on  data  from  21 
in 
Member  States),  ranging  from  0.27% 
Romania  to  5.87%  in  France  (8.95%  for 
Belgium but drawing on partial data). This is 
a  slight  increase  compared  to  the  2009 
figure  of  3.84%.  The  total  transnationally 
coordinated 
for  2010 
research  budget 
represents  €4.2  bn  (out  of  which  €2.7  bn  is 
assigned to the European Space Agency).  

In  Figure  3,  countries  are  mapped 

according to the following dimensions: 

•  GBAORD (divided into 4 categories: from 
€10 mln to €100 mln, from €100 mln to 
€1 bn, from €1 bn to €10 bn and greater 
than €10 bn). 

•  The share of public funding dedicated to 
transnationally  coordinated  research  in 
GBAORD  compared  to  the  EU  average 
(4.27% 
ESA 
contributions  and  1.5%  of  GBAORD 
without ESA contributions). 

GBAORD  with 

of 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                        
 
 
 
(cid:132)  Figure 2. National public funding to transnationally coordinated research for EU27 in 2010 

Source: Eurostat 

(cid:132)  Figure 3. Share of national public funding to transnationally coordinated research in total GBAORD in 

2010 (including ESA contributions) 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  figure  shows  that  the  countries 
with  the  highest  share  of  transnationally 
coordinated  national  public  funding  (as  a 
percentage  of  GBAORD)  also  represent  the 
largest 
in 
absolute  terms.  This  means  that  the  largest 
spenders are also the ones with the highest 
degree of coordination. 

joint  national  public  funding 

The  highest  spenders  also  have  a 
clear  orientation  towards  grand  challenges, 
albeit  in  different  ways.  Among  the  EU-13 
there  seems  to  be  a  gap  between  Poland, 
the  Czech  Republic  and  Estonia  that  have  a 
clear  orientation  towards  grand  challenges, 
joint 
and 

rest  of  EU-13  where 

the 

programmes  seem  more  weakly  connected 
to grand challenges (Doussineau et al, 2013). 

the 

volume 

Looking 

excluding 

at 
spending 

of 
coordinated 
ESA 
contributions  (EU28+NO+CH,  2010  figures), 
Figure 4 shows that two thirds of the total is 
represented  by  only 
countries: 
Germany, France, the UK and Italy (Group 1). 
A  second  group  of  eleven  countries  (Group 
2)  represent  another  30%  of  the  total 
coordinated 
The 
remaining countries account for less than 4% 
(Groups 3 and 4). 

spending 

volume. 

four 

(cid:132)  Figure 4. Relative contributions of EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland to the total annual 
transnationally coordinated public national research funding for 2010 (excluding ESA contributions) 

In  relative  terms,  the  degrees  of 
coordination,  excluding  ESA  contributions, 
give  a  more  diverse  picture  than  when 
including them. Figure 5 below presents the 
same four country groups of Figure 4 above 
in  relation  to  their  absolute  and  relative 

coordinated spending. As indicated in Figure 
5,  which  excludes  the  ESA  contributions, 
four  main  country  groups  can  be  identified 
according  to  the  amount  of  their  public 
spending for research and development. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  Figure 5.  Share of national public funding to transnationally coordinated research in total GBAORD 

in 2010 (excluding ESA contributions) 

2.3  The volume of joint calls 

of 

public 

Looking  at  programme  coordination 
over time, Niehoff (2014) estimates that the 
total 
research 
funding 
implemented by FP6 and FP7 ERA-NET/ERA-
NET  Plus  Actions  is  expected  to  reach  €3.1 
bn  between  2004  and  2017,  through  396 
joint  calls  (finished,  ongoing  and  planned 
calls).  The  annual  amount  represented  by 
joint  calls  of  ERA-NET  and  ERA-NET  Plus 
actions has been growing since 2004.  

Figure 6 shows the total  public funding 
per  year  for  calls  implemented  by  ERA-NET, 
ERA-NET  Plus,  and,  ERA-NET  Cofund 
(H2020),  as  well  as  calls  from  JPIs  (calls 
implemented  by  MS  only)  for  the  period 
2004-2017. Data on both past and currently 
planned calls are included. The figure shows 
that the total public funding for calls will be 
over €0.6 bn in 2016. In spite of this increase 

12 

in the total amount spent through joint calls, 
in  relative  terms  the  amounts  stay  very  low 
compared to total GBAORD. In 2012 the ERA 
(European  Commission, 
Communication 
2012) stated that the level of alignment was 
too low to have a serious impact on big and 
complex challenges, however without giving 
a  clear  target  for  the  share  of  GBAORD 
transnationally  coordinated  that  would  be 
required.  

An interesting side effect however from 
the  joint  calls  is  the  leverage  effect  (the 
amount  of  public  funding  of  transnational 
projects  generated  per  €1  of  Framework 
Programme  funding),  which  increased  from 
6  under  FP6  to  10  under  FP7.    The  effect  is 
also a lot bigger for those FP7 ERA-NETs that 
continued  from  FP6  (leverage  effect  of  16) 
compared  to  the  new  ERA-NETs  under  FP7, 
with a leverage effect of 7 (Niehoff, 2014). 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  Figure 6. Total public funding per year for calls implemented by ERA-NET , ERA-NET Plus, JPIs (calls 
implemented by MS only) and ERA-NET Cofund under Horizon 2020 actions over the period 2004-
2017 including currently planned calls [in mln Euro] (Niehoff, 2014) 

13 

 
(cid:132)  3. Programme coordination under the Framework 
Programmes, Horizon2020 and Cohesion Policy 

Public  R&D  cooperation  between  EU 
Member  States  is  obviously  not  limited  to 
transnational coordination of existing public 
national  research  budget  spending.  This 
section 
looks  at  cooperation  between 
Member  States  in  the  framework  of  EU 
innovation  and  Cohesion 
research  and 
Policy. 
the 
better 
investments  made  by  country  we  first  look 
at the contributions by Member State to the 
total EU budget. 

understand 

To 

3.1  National contributions to the total 

EU budget 

to  both 

considering 

country 
When 
contributions 
the  Framework 
Programmes  and  the  Cohesion  Policy  funds 
we need to look at the relative contributions 
of  MS  to  the  European  Union  in  general. 
relative  annual 
the 
Figure  7 
contribution for 2012. It shows a picture that 
is  rather  similar  to  Figure  4,  with  four 
countries  accounting  for  60%  of  the  total 
budget.  

shows 

(cid:132)  Figure 7. National contribution per Member State and traditional own resources collected on behalf 

of the EU in 2012 

Source: Eurostat (2013) processed by JRC-IPTS. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.2  European Framework Programmes 

and Horizon 2020 

The  biggest  public  R&D  cooperation  in 
the  EU  is  represented  by  the  Framework 
Programme,  and 
subsequently  Horizon 
2020.  Figure  8  below  shows  the  history  of 
annual  budgets  assigned  to  the  European 
Framework Programme for research since its 
start in 1984 until 2020 (expenditure up until 

the 

part 

include 

2011,  planned  expenditure  for  2012-2013 
and estimated expenditure as of 2014). Data 
the 
from  2014  onwards  also 
European 
of 
innovation 
programme, i.e. the former Competitiveness 
and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) 
(representing  €3.621  bn  over  2007-2013) 
and  the  European  Institute  for  Innovation 
and Technology (EIT) (representing €0.31 bn 
over 2008-2013). 

(cid:132)  Figure 8. Annual budget for the Framework Programmes and for Horizon 2020 

Please note that for FP7, actual expenditure for 2007-2011 is given, while for 2012-2013 planned expenditure is 
used.  For  Horizon  2020,  2014  data  are  based  on  the  2014  Work  Programme.  2015  data  may  change  at  the 
moment of approval of the 2015 Work Programme. Data for 2016 and onwards based on pro rata division of 
total H2020 budget (€78,6 bn) minus 2014-2015 provisions. Prices 2013. (Source: European Commission – DG 
Research and Innovation and IPTS adaptations) 

Whereas under FP7 (2007-2013) €55.8bn 
was planned to be spent over the lifetime of 
the  programme  (excluding  the  budgets  for 
CIP  and  EIT),  for  Horizon  2020  (2014-2020) 
this amount rises to €78.6 bn (including the 
budgets  for  competitiveness  and  innovation 
and  for  the  EIT).  This  is  the  largest  amount 
so  far  that  Europe  has  dedicated  to  joint 
public  research  and  innovation  spending. 
Figure  8  shows  that  there  has  been  this 
rising  trend  since  the  beginning.  In  the 
transition years between programmes there 

are  small  drops  in  budgets,  reflecting  the 
time  typically  needed  to  get  the  next 
programme  fully  operational.  In  2014  this 
drop  is  particularly  marked,  reflecting  the 
fact  that  FP7  was  heavily  backloaded  and 
Horizon  2020  is  not  frontloaded.  Horizon 
2020  also  has  a  larger  share  of  its  budget 
dedicated  to  innovation.  For  example,  the 
EIT  is  envisaged  to  spend  about  ten  times 
the  budget  it  has  spent  since  2008,  with  a 
dedicated  budget  of  €2.7  bn  over  2014-
2020. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
3.3  Public national contributions 

complementing the EC contribution 
under FP7  

The  two  most  common  types  of  public 
research  organisations  participating  in  FP7 
are  public  research  centres  and  public 
universities.  On  average, 
in  FP7,  public 
universities  have  been  funded  at  a  rate  of 
82.4%  and  public  research  centres  at  75.2% 
of  their  eligible  costs,  with  some  disparities 
between countries depending of the type of 
instruments)  the 
activities  (and  funding 
public organisations are involved in. Analysis 
of  the  FP7  contracts  database  reveals  the 
national  contributions  that  complement  the 

EC contributions. For the total programming 
FP7  period  (up  until  the  first  half  of  2013) 
national  contributions  can  be  estimated  at 
around  €4.4bn  (or  over  €0.6bn  annually 
under  the  hypothesis  of  a  linear  annual 
distribution),  out  of  which  €2.9bn  from 
public  universities  and  €1.5  bn  from  public 
research  centres.  A  ranking  by  country  (see 
Figure 9) of national contributions dedicated 
to  public  participants 
research 
centres  and  public  universities)  reveals  that 
France has the highest national contribution 
for its research entities, followed by the UK, 
Germany,  Italy,  the  Netherlands,  Spain  , 
Sweden and Finland.  

(public 

(cid:132)  Figure 9. National contribution dedicated to public research centres (REC) and public universities 

(HES) complementing the EC contribution in the FP7 

Source: IPTS calculations based on FP7 contract database (November 2013) 

for  most 

         Looking  at  the  relative  importance  of 
research  centres  versus  public 
public 
universities, 
the 
participation 
universities 
represents  the  highest  share  (Figure  9)  in 
FP7  collaborations.  Only  for  France  and 
Finland  does  the  relative  participation  of 

countries 

public 

of 

public  research  centres  (REC)  appear  more 
significant  than  for  public  universities.  For 
France  it  should  be  noted  that  participation 
of research and technology organisations are 
in  most  cases  twinned  with  universities 
through  the  so  called  “unités  mixtes  de 
recherche".  

16 

 
 
 
 
 
3.4 Cohesion Policy 

Another 

important  source  of  public 
research  funding  at  EU  level  is  represented 
by Cohesion Policy. In the period 2007-2013, 
€86  bn  (€65  bn  from  the  ERDF  alone)  or 
around 25% of total Cohesion Policy budget 
have been allocated to innovation (Research 
infrastructures, 
including 
and 

Innovation 

ICT  development  and 
Entrepreneurship, 
human capital actions). For the period 2014-
2020, Cohesion Policy will make available up 
to €351.8 bn, out of which €100 bn, or 28%, 
are expected to be assigned to research and 
innovation. Figure 10 puts this in a historical 
perspective, illustrating the constantly rising 
relative 
research  and 
innovation in Cohesion Policy over time. 

importance  of 

(cid:132)  Figure 10. Relative share of Cohesion Policy funding assigned to R&D and innovation over time 

Source: European Commission: DG Research and Innovation and JRC-IPTS 

national  and  regional  authorities.  The  rising 
importance  of  research  and  innovation  in 
Cohesion  Policy  is  also  reflected  by  the 
introduction  of an  ex-ante conditionality for 
regions 
smart 
specialisation  strategy  (RIS3-strategy)  for 
objective no 1 of the Cohesion Policy funds: 
technological 
research, 
strengthening 
development and innovation.  

to  have 

regional 

a 

Under  Europe  2020, 

synergies 
between  Horizon  2020  and  Cohesion  Policy 
are  being  reinforced.  Horizon  2020  focuses 
on  supporting  excellence  through  direct 
competitive  calls  to  final  beneficiaries  and 
Cohesion  Policy  applies  a  place-based 
approach 
non-competitive 
shared  management 
attribution  with 
between the European Commission and the 

through 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  4. Policy implications  

Examination of these different data sets 
indicates  that  the  volume  of  research  funds 
allocated  in  a  coordinated  way  has  overall 
gradually been increasing quite steadily over 
time.  In  light  of  the  increasingly  pervasive 
policy focus on addressing Grand Challenges, 
how  to  determine  a  sufficient 
level  of 
coordination  remains  unclear.  However,  a 
important  question  may  be  the 
more 
relative  importance  of  each  challenge,  as 
reflected  by  the  amount  of  research  funds 
(coordinated or otherwise) allocated to each 
of  them.  This  will  be  the  result  of  the 
decisions  of  a  wide  set  of  stakeholders 
within  the  European  research  landscape.  As 
taken 
such  decisions  are  not  being 
simultaneously 
various 
stakeholders,  this  priority  setting  exercise 
can be seen as a constantly evolving process. 
To  better  understand  and  respond  to  this 
evolution,  a  valuable  tool  for  policy  makers 
is  a  dynamic  map  of  the  public  research 
landscape 
all 
Europe, 
stakeholders,  the  challenges  they  address 
and  the  coordination  patterns  that  exist. 
Stakeholders  and  coordination 
initiatives 
include  public  research 
mapped  should 
research 
organisations 
alliances, 
and 
interregional 
initiatives, 
universities,  joint  programming  initiatives, 
ERA 
infrastructure 
research 
chairs, 
initiatives, etc.  

and 
regional 

collaboration 

authorities 

European 

including 

these 

by 

in 

If 
contribute 

research 
to 

in  Europe 
growth 

and 

is  also 

to 
increased 

competitiveness (See Europe 2020), then the 
coordination of innovation funding in Europe 
is  clearly  on  the  radar.  Here  again,  the 
relative  importance  of  each  challenge  in 
innovation  is  determined  by  a  wide  set  of 
stakeholders  and  coordination  initiatives.  A 
dynamic mapping tool should therefore also 
include  (public  and  private)  stakeholders 
that  fund  innovation,  the  challenges  they 
address 
the 
coordination  patterns  emerging.  Relevant 
initiatives 
stakeholders  and  coordination 
innovation 
Knowledge 
include 
Technology 
communities, 
Innovation 
Platforms, 
Emerging 
Partnerships, 
Technologies ("FET") Flagships, etc. 

European 
Future 

evolution  of 

European 

and 

and 

the 

& 

coordinated 

The  NETWATCH  platform  has  only  gone 
part of the way to providing such a dynamic 
map,  and  there  are  a  variety  of  future 
directions  for  development.  The  networks 
hitherto  covered  by  the  platform  represent 
totally  annually 
around  10%  of 
the 
national 
transnationally 
research  budget  (see  Figure  2).  A  potential 
future  evolution  of  the  platform  could 
progressively  cover  a  higher  percentage  of 
transnationally 
national 
research  budgets.  Alternatively,  a  web-
towards 
based  platform  could  evolve 
addressing  the  endeavour  suggested  above, 
covering 
additional 
stakeholders  from  the  European  research 
innovation 
landscape  or 
landscape. 

the  European 

coordinated 

engaging 

and 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  5. Acknowledgements 

The authors would like to thank the NETWATCH and ERA-LEARN advisory board members and 

Julia Prikoszovits of DG RTD for their helpful comments. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:132)  6. References 

Council of the European Union (2012) Conclusions on 'A reinforced European research area 
partnership for excellence and growth', 3208th COMPETITIVENESS (Internal Market, Industry, Research and 
Space) Council meeting, Brussels, 11 December 2012. Available at: 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/intm/134168.pdf. 

Doussineau, M., Marinelli, E., Chioncel, M., Haegeman, K., Carat, G. and Boden, M. (2013) ERA 

Communication Synthesis Report, EUR 26232 EN, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 
Available at: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC85253.pdf. 

European Commission (2010) EUROPE 2020, A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive 

growth, COM (2010) 2020 final. Available at: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF. 

European Commission (2010a) Regional Policy contributing to smart growth in Europe 2020 

COM(2010) 553 final. Available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/communic/smart_growth/comm2010_553_e
n.pdf. 

European Commission (2012) A Reinforced European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and 

Growth. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2012) 392 final. Available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/era-communication_en.pdf 

EC (2013) EU budget 2012 Financial Report, ISBN 978-92-79-29627-7, Luxembourg: Publications 

Office of the European Union, 2013. Available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/budget/financialreport/pdf/financialreport-2012_en.pdf. 

Haegeman, K., Harrap, N., Boden, M. and Özbolat, N. (2014) Added Value of Transnational 
Research Programming: Lessons from Longstanding Programme Collaborations in Europe - Netwatch Policy 
Brief Series – Brief Nr3, JRC Technical Reports, EUR 26037 EN, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the 
European Union. Available at: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC82303.pdf. 

Niehoff, J. (2014) The ERA-NET scheme from FP6 to Horizon 2020: Report on ERA-NETs, their calls 

and the experiences from the first calls under Horizon 2020, October 2014. 

Witzanyová,  N.,  EERA  congress  2014  –  Session  on  review  of  the  EERA  Joint  Programmes  – 
at:  http://www.eera-

Introduction 
set.eu/lw_resource/datapool/_items/item_857/eera_congress_2014_review_sessionpresentation.pptx. 

session,  Brussels,  April  9th,  2014.  Available 

the 

to 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union 

Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed. 

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. 

It can be accessed through the Europa server  http://europa.eu. 

How to obtain EU publications 

Our publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu), 

where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice. 

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. 

You can obtain their contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758. 

European Commission 

EUR 27164 – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies 

Title: Measuring progress in transnational coordination of research programming in Europe 

Authors: Karel Haegeman, Mathieu Doussineau and Mark Boden 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 

2015 -20 pp. – 21.0 x 29.7 cm 

EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series – ISSN 1831-9424 (online) 

ISBN 978-92-79-47105-6 (pdf) 

doi:10.2791/953432 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
z 

L
F
-
N
A
-
2
7
1
6
4
-
E
N
-
N

JRC Mission

As the Commission’s  
in-house science service,  
the Joint Research Centre’s  
mission is to provide EU  
policies with independent,  
evidence-based scientific  
and technical support  
throughout the whole  
policy cycle. 

Working in close  
cooperation with policy  
Directorates-General,  
the JRC addresses key  
societal challenges while  
stimulating innovation  
through developing  
new methods, tools  
and standards, and sharing  
its know-how with  
the Member States,  
the scientific community  
and international partners. 

Serving society  
Stimulating innovation  
Supporting legislation 

doi:10.2791/953432

ISBN 978-92-79-47105-6 

22