REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT The European Research Area: advancing together the Europe of research and innovation
Date: 2019-02-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission
Subjects: EU research policy, competition policy, gender equality, innovation, international cooperation, job access, research and development, research infrastructure, research staff, scientific cooperation

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.2.2019  COM(2019) 83 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT The European Research Area: advancing together the Europe of research and innovation  
 
 
The  European  Research  Area:  advancing  together  the  Europe  of  research  and 
innovation. 

1.  INTRODUCTION 

The  2018  ERA  Progress  Report  assesses  the  current  state  of  the  European  Research  Area 
(ERA) and the progress made on ERA implementation in 2016-20181. It is the second time in 
a row that progress has been measured at country level using the ERA monitoring mechanism 
—  a set of 24 core indicators jointly defined by Member States, research stakeholders and the 
Commission that includes eight headline indicators2. 

ERA implementation focuses on six priorities: 

1.  More effective national research systems 
2.  Optimal transnational cooperation and competition, including ‘jointly addressing grand 

challenges’ and ‘research infrastructures’ 

3.  An open labour market for researchers 
4.  Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research 
5.  Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge, including ‘knowledge 

circulation’ and ‘open access’ 

6.  International cooperation. 

The  2016  ERA  Progress  Report  showed  that  substantial  progress  had  been  made  on  ERA 
implementation over the last decade. At EU level, all headline indicators improved, although 
there  were  still  large  disparities  between  Member  States  in  both  performance  levels  and 
growth rates. 

Based  on  the  overall  evolution  of  the  headline  indicators,  progress  on  ERA  implementation 
continues,  albeit  at  a  slower  pace  than  before.  The  growth  rate  of  some  headline  indicators 
(priorities 5 and 6) is stable, while for others (priorities 1, 2 and 4) it has slowed. One headline 
indicator  (priority  3)  even  has  a  negative  growth  rate.  However,  this  is  of  no  immediate 
concern as this indicator is only a proxy and the complementary indicators for priority 3 are 
still improving. 

The  table  at  the  end  of  the  document  presents  the  growth  rates  of  the  different  headline 
indicators. 

1 The Commission reports on a biennial basis on ERA progress. Policy developments have been described from 
mid-2016 (cut-off date for the 2016 ERA Progress Report) to mid-2018 (cut-off date for the 2018 ERA Progress 
Report). However, indicators are only available after some delay. As a result, most of the indicators in this report 
refer to previous years. 
2 Findings throughout  this report refer to the Science-Metrix Report ‘Data  gathering and information  for 2018 
ERA monitoring’, which also includes definitions of the headline indicators. Due to the availability of statistical 
data, the definition of a few indicators had to be adjusted. 

1 

 
 
                                                           
In  November  2018,  the  Council  adopted  conclusions  on  ERA  governance3.  It  recalled  its 
conclusions of May  2015, which  formed the basis  for the subsequent  ERA National Action 
Plans (NAPs) and called for the monitoring of ERA roadmap implementation to be integrated 
into  the  ERA  progress  reports  based  on  headline  indicators  proposed  by  the  European 
Research Area and Innovation Committee4. 

Midway  through  the  2015-2020  ERA  Roadmap,  24  Member  States  and  4  Associated 
Countries  have  so  far  adopted  NAPs  for  this  period.  These  provide  official  information  on 
ERA  strategies  and  corresponding  policy  measures  in  these  Member  States  and  Associated 
Countries.  They  constitute  an  important  source  for  charting  the  progress  of  ERA 
implementation. The majority of NAPs are structured according to the six ERA priorities — 
further  evidence  of  systematic  and  shared  efforts  to  plan  national  reforms  in  order  to 
implement the ERA. 

Overall,  this  report  shows  that  progress  on  ERA  implementation  has  been  slowing  and  that 
major disparities still exist between countries, or are growing in part. These trends call for a 
renewed  commitment  to  (i)  further  strengthening  shared  efforts  at  all  levels;  (ii)  reforming 
national  research  and  innovation  systems;  and  (iii)  realising  a  well-functioning  ERA.  The 
Commission  has  anticipated  this  need  by  proposing  a  number  of  programmes  for  the  next 
financing  period  2021-2027:  these  include  regional  funds,  a  European  reform  delivery  tool 
and the EU’s next research and innovation (R&I) framework programme — Horizon Europe. 
the  ERA.
The 

strengthen 

dedicated 

includes 

pillar 

latter 

help 

to 

a 

3 Doc. 14516/18. 
4 Doc. 9351/15. 

2 

 
 
                                                           
2.  KEY FINDINGS FROM THE ERA PROGRESS REPORT 
2.1.  More effective national research systems 

Objective:  
Effectively  designed  and  efficiently  functioning  national  research  and  innovation  systems 
deriving maximal value from public money.  

Deliverables:  
Better  alignment  of  national  policies  with  shared  European  priorities,  applying  the  core 
principles of international peer review to funding organisations, finding a satisfactory balance 
between  competitive  and  institutional  funding  and  investing  in  wider  education  and 
innovation systems. 

Analysis  of  the  headline  indicator  shows  that  research  excellence  increased  at  an  annual 
growth rate of 3.2 % in  2013-2016 (EU-28 average)5. However, this growth  rate has halved 
compared to 2010-2013. 

In  general,  while  public  funding  on  R&D  is  a  key  driver  of  the  strength  and  international 
competitiveness of domestic R&I systems, some countries are still cutting their spending on 
R&I (government budget allocations for research & development/GBARD as a percentage of 
GDP), and others made no substantial increases in 2014-20166. However, countries with less 
developed national research systems also tend to rely on EU structural and investment funds 
to  supplement  domestic  R&I  budgets.  A  number  of  ERA  countries7  also  use  indirect  fiscal 
measures to complement direct government funding. 

Competitive funding — research funding allocated on a competitive basis and involving the 
participation of international experts in review panels — has become common practice among 
ERA  countries.  However,  the  balance  between  competitive  funding  and  block  funding  still 
varies  greatly  between  countries.  In  some  countries  with  less  developed  R&I  systems,  less 
competitive research performing organisations rely mainly on block funding; this often affects 
their ability to attract the best talent and to develop and maintain research infrastructures. This 
warrants further reforms to their funding systems to achieve an appropriate balance. 

The majority of NAPs  are clearly structured according to  ERA priorities. They demonstrate 
increasing  policy  alignment  of  national  R&I  policies  in  the  ERA  countries  with  EU-level 
objectives  aimed  at  achieving  the  ERA.  EU  Member  States  are  also  trying  to  make  their 
national research systems more efficient and competitive through implementing national and 
regional smart specialisation strategies. 

5 Technical report, Table 4. 
6 Technical report, Table 5. 
7 ‘ERA countries’ include EU Member States and countries associated with the framework programme. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Conclusion 

Almost all countries have adopted or updated national strategies for research and innovation, 
which  is  expected  to  enhance  research  excellence.  Despite  progress  made  in  recent  years, 
analysis  points  to  a  need  to  better  align  various  stakeholders’  R&I  strategies  so  that  they 
cooperate  in  a  more  efficient  way.  The  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  national  R&I  policies 
should  be  a  central  plank  in  improving  the  effectiveness  of  national  R&I  systems,  reducing 
fragmentation  and  identifying  areas  for  improvement,  notably  aligning  national  and  EU 
instruments. 

2.2.  Optimal transnational cooperation and competition 

Jointly addressing grand challenges 

Objective:  
Working together in a better way to address the grand challenges that face us all is central to 
Europe’s ability to respond to a dynamic and changing world.  

Deliverables:  
Ensuring  that  ministries  and  research  funding  organisations  work  more  closely  together  to 
achieve  better  alignment  with  the  themes  and  priorities  of  the  Joint  Programme  Initiatives, 
mutual  recognition  of  evaluation  procedures,  common  terminologies  and  procedures  for 
implementing R&I programmes, better integration of calls and promoting a more international 
perspective. 

The findings show that although this priority still has one of the highest growth rates among 
all  ERA  headline  indicators  with  an  annual  growth  rate  of  3.9 %  in  2014-2016,  almost  all 
countries  have  seen  a  slowdown  in  national  GBARD  allocated  to  EU-wide  transnational 
public R&D8. 

Pooling  resources  and  research  capacities  to  more  effectively  address  common  challenges 
remains  one  of  the  main  perceived  and  actual  benefits  of  EU-transnational  cooperation. 
Active  participation  in  public-public  partnerships  (P2Ps)9  was  one  of  the  most  frequently 
mentioned strategic goals in the NAPs. 

Although steady progress has been made over the years, further achievements require (i) more 
systemic  coordination  between  the  priorities  of  P2Ps  and  national  research  agendas  and 
programmes;  and (ii) systematic monitoring and evaluation  of the impact  of participation in 
P2Ps,  ensuring  political  commitment  and  the  availability  of  funding10.  These  developments 
are supported by a new political ambition to increase the impact of the EU’s R&I partnership 

8  Technical  report,  page  46.  Growth  rates  for  individual  countries  could  have  significant  fluctuations  between 
years. 
9  ERA-NET  Cofund,  European  Joint  Programme  Cofund,  initiatives  based  on  Article 185  of  TFEU,  joint 
programming initiatives. 
10 Technical report, page 46. 

4 

 
 
                                                           
landscape,  underpinned  by  the  Council  conclusions11  and  ERAC  recommendations  on 
partnerships. 

Conclusion 

Most countries are making progress in enhancing their participation in P2Ps. However, efforts 
to  better  coordinate  relevant  national  policies  and  resources  in  order  to  achieve  agreed 
priorities will need to be increased if maximum advantage is to be taken from a simpler and 
more impact-oriented EU R&I partnership landscape. This requires clear national governance 
structures  and  a  robust  and  comprehensive  framework  for  evaluating  and  monitoring  the 
impact of P2P networks at national level12. 

Research infrastructures 

Objective: 

High-quality,  accessible  Research  Infrastructures  are  at  the  heart  of  the  knowledge  triangle 
and  key  to  Europe's  ambition  to  lead  the  global  movement  towards  Open  Science.  Member 
States  have  developed  a  collective  approach  through  the  European  Strategy  Forum  on 
Research  Infrastructures  (ESFRI),  Horizon  2020  and  the  European  Research  Infrastructure 
Consortium (ERIC) legal framework. 

Deliverables: 

Ensuring that the ESFRI roadmap and the national R&I roadmaps are compatible with each 
other,  facilitating  access  to  research  infrastructures  to  Member  States  which  are  unable  to 
invest in large infrastructures and careful examination of the planned financial contributions. 

Findings show that despite heterogeneity among ERA countries, strategic priorities have been 
defined  at  national  level.  The  ESFRI  roadmaps  have  proved  to  be  a  valuable  input  into 
national  decision-making  processes,  often  leading  to  the  alignment  of  national  and  ESFRI 
roadmaps. 

While  over  half  of  the  ERA  countries,  and  19  of  the  28  EU  Member  States,  had  national 
roadmaps in place together with ESFRI research infrastructures, only a third of them had also 
identified their funding needs. Since the last monitoring exercise in 2016, eight countries have 
updated  their  roadmaps,  with  some  of  them  identifying  funding  requirements  for  the  first 
time. When considering both ESFRI projects and landmarks, data shows that participation of 
countries  just  below  the  ERA  average  is  increasing  faster  than  for  countries  just  above  the 
average  (with  growth  rates  doubling,  respectively  increasing  by  40 %  compared  to  2016 
values). This indicates a substantial trend of convergence among ERA countries. 

Depending  on  the  size  of  their  economy  and  the  complexity  of  their  R&I  system,  decision-
making  processes  vary  across  countries.  Although  open  calls  are  the  most  frequent 

11 Doc. 15320/17. 
12 Technical report, page 66. 

5 

 
 
                                                           
mechanism  used  to  allocate  funding,  instruments  and  procedures  for  funding  research 
infrastructures differ considerably and are often used in different policy mixes. 

To further increase the effectiveness of research infrastructures in Europe, there needs to be a 
better exchange of information on the actual infrastructure capacity, funding priorities, plans 
and strategies — both across countries/regions and between research organisations. Analysis 
shows  that  countries  increasingly  specialise  in  specific  areas  when  allocating  funding  to 
national research infrastructures, responding to the need to rationalise overall rising costs. 

Conclusion 

Compared  to  2016,  participation  in  both  ESFRI  projects  and  landmarks  shows  clear  overall 
growth, with increasing pan-European inclusiveness and accessibility. As of 2018, over half 
of the ERA countries had roadmaps in place together with ESFRI research infrastructures, but 
only  a  third  of  them  had  also  identified  funding  needs.  However,  more  cooperation  and 
synchronisation  of  national  procedures  (for  setting  priorities,  monitoring  and  long-term 
funding) is needed to make the European research infrastructure ecosystem more robust and 
increase the effectiveness of public investments in this area. 

2.3.  An open labour market for researchers 

Objective:  

A  truly  open  and  excellence-driven  ERA  in  which  highly  skilled  and  qualified  people  can 
move seamlessly across borders to where their talents can be best employed. 

Deliverables:  

Governments  and  stakeholders  should  consider  how  the  rules  for  national  funding  schemes 
could better support the principles of openness, transparency and merit-based recruitment and 
remove legal barriers to open recruitment of researchers in research performing organisations 
and define new ways to researcher career development. 

The findings show that the number of research vacancies advertised on the EURAXESS job 
portal  in  2015-2016  fell  by  5 %  on  average  for  the  whole  country  group.  This  reversed 
previous positive growth of 7.8 % in 2012-2014, and could be partly due to the alternative use 
of similar national portals. 

Nonetheless,  findings  also  show  an  EU-28  annual  average  growth  of  3.9 %  in  the  share  of 
doctoral students with citizenship of another EU Member State and 7.5 % growth in the share 
of  researchers  expressing  their  satisfaction  with  how  the  recruitment  process  in  their  home 
research institution is open, transparent and merit-based. For the latter, there was growth for 
almost all Member States. 

The analysis indicates that a large gap still exists between EU countries in terms of an open 
labour market  and career development  opportunities provided to  researchers. This  results in 
large  differences  in  the  attractiveness  of  research  careers  among  different  countries  and 
regions  in  Europe. Such a  gap is  not  just  a  result  of different higher education systems  and 
career structures, but also of differing economic development that influences public budgets 

6 

 
 
for  research  and  with  it  the  salaries  of  researchers  and  other  conditions.  The  availability  of 
opportunities  for  learning,  research  funding  opportunities,  financial  security  and  shares  of 
fixed-term contracts are key defining factors in the attractiveness of a region or country. 

Conclusion 

The number of job vacancies advertised on the EURAXESS platform has recently decreased, 
although researchers across Europe are more satisfied with the level of open, merit-based and 
transparent recruitment procedures in their home institutions. The growing share of doctoral 
students with citizenship of another Member State is a positive sign of international mobility. 
However, large gaps still exist between Member States in terms of career attractiveness and 
researchers’ 
development  opportunities 
international  mobility  by  refining  the  effectiveness  of  national/regional  research  ecosystems 
in terms of cutting-edge research. In addition to the characteristics above, the availability of 
top-level infrastructures, provision of efficient interactions between public and private actors 
and a highly innovative business sector add to increased mobility and attractiveness. 

researchers.  Governments  can 

improve 

for 

2.4.  Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research 

Objective:  

To foster scientific excellence by fully utilising gender diversity and equality and avoiding an 
indefensible waste of talent. 

Deliverables:  

Developing  policies  on  gender  equality,  paying  special  attention  to  areas  where  women  are 
underrepresented,  promoting  approaches  to  gender  mainstreaming  and  incorporating  gender 
perspectives in research. 

The report shows that the share of women in the highest-level research positions (Grade A) in 
higher  education  increased  by  1 %  per  year  in  2014-2016  in  the  EU-2813,  rising  to  24 %  in 
2016. Although progress has been made in almost all Member States, the trend is still uneven. 

Analysis shows that gender equality plans and related policies are being increasingly adopted 
at national or EU level to enact institutional change. More and more countries are engaged in 
improving  transparency  in  recruitment  and  promotion,  and  include  such  initiatives  in  their 
NAPs. However, the analysis of NAPs points to a divide between various Member States in 
terms of the development of gender objectives14. 

Significant efforts have been made to include a gender dimension in research at EU level and 
across ERA countries. This has resulted in a higher number of publications that incorporate a 
gender dimension, although the overall level of integration remains low. 

13 Technical report, Table 15. 
14 Three objectives have been defined: 1. Remove barriers to the recruitment and career progression of female 
researchers;  2.  Address  gender  imbalances  in  decision-making  processes;  and  3.  Strengthen  the  gender 
dimension in research content. 

7 

 
 
                                                           
While some progress has been made, gender inequality still exists in research and academia. 
A  glass  ceiling  persists  in  most  ERA  countries.  This  is  still  the  case  despite  policies  and 
initiatives having been adopted at EU, national and institutional level to tackle issues such as 
an unconscious bias in evaluation, wage gaps15 and equal career opportunities. 

Conclusion 

The majority of countries have made progress in setting up more comprehensive strategies for 
gender  equality  in  R&I,  although  progress  is  slow  and  uneven  across  the  ERA.  Efforts  to 
increase  the  enrolment  and  retention  of  women  in  science,  implement  work-life  balance 
policies, reduce the gender pay gap and remove obstacles to women’s career progression as 
well  as  better  integrate  the  gender  dimension  in  R&I  content  are  still  needed  in  order  to 
achieve gender equality and gender mainstreaming in the ERA. 

2.5.  Optimal circulation, access to and transfer to scientific knowledge, including via 

digital ERA 

Knowledge transfer and open innovation 

Objective:  
Removing barriers to the wider use of knowledge to increase growth and competitiveness for 
Europe by fully implementing knowledge transfer policies. 

Deliverables: 

Promoting effective knowledge transfer mechanisms, establishing policies and procedures for 
intellectual property management. 

Since the last ERA Progress Report in 2016, more schemes and initiatives on open innovation 
and  knowledge  transfer  have  been  adopted  across  the  ERA,  with  a  specific  focus  on  joint 
activities  between  public  research  organisations  and  the  private  sector.  However,  different 
intellectual property rules are still applied at national level. 

The study found that around 15 % of firms involved in product or process innovation in the 
EU-28  cooperate  with  universities,  government,  public  or  private  research  institutes16.  In 
2012-2014,  private  sector  cooperation  with  universities  and  higher  education  institutions 
increased by 0.7 % on average per  year and by 4 % with governmental and private research 
institutes. 

The  number  of  public-private  co-publications  per  million  of  the  population  has  been  stable. 
However, in recent years there has been a decrease in funding provided by the private sector 
to universities and public research institutes. 

15 EU, strategic engagement gender equality 2016-2019: https://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/eu-policy/strategic-
engagement-gender-equality-2016-2019_en. 
16 Technical report, page 76. 

8 

 
 
 
                                                           
Conclusion 

The situation with regard to policies that support knowledge circulation and open innovation 
still differs across  Europe.  In  general,  more initiatives and regulatory frameworks are being 
introduced  across  the  ERA  to  enhance  research  and  innovation  cooperation  between  the 
public and private sectors. However, the transfer of research results to the market and closer 
collaboration  between  industry  and  academia  still  need  to  be  promoted  in  many  ERA 
countries, for example using a combination of financial incentives and supportive regulatory 
frameworks.  Ongoing  challenges  also  include  the  implementation  of  effective  measures  to 
evaluate and monitor research and innovation policies. 

Open access to publications and data 

Objective: 

Open access to scientific publications promotes wider and faster circulation of scientific ideas, 
increasing the benefits to both science itself and to society as a whole. It is a key part of the 
wider move to Open Science. 

Deliverables: 

Promoting  Gold  and/or  Green  Open  Access  in  line  with  the  Commission’s  2012 
Recommendation  on  access  to  and  promotion  of  scientific  information17,  consider  aligning  
and  coordinating  negotiations  with  scientific  publishers  to  support  a  transition  to  new  and 
more balanced business models. 

In 2018, 31 ERA countries had policies and/or guidelines in place to support open access to 
publications (OA), Research Data Management (RDM) or open science. 19 of these countries 
have  adopted  legal  measures  in  these  three  areas18.  However,  even  in  countries  where  legal 
measures  have  been  adopted,  their  enforcement  varies  greatly.  Only  a  few  ERA  countries 
have  introduced  measures  to  monitor  the  development  of  OA  and  RDM  policies  and  their 
impact. 

In  recent  years,  open  access  to  publications  has  evolved  and  progressed  rapidly,  with  up  to 
50 % of all publications across ERA countries in 201619. The disparity in the implementation 
of OA policies among countries is reflected in the diverse enforcement of policies and in the 
variety  of  OA  types  preferred.  Some  countries  prefer  gold  OA,  while  others  encourage  the 
green  route  (self-archiving  in  repositories),  and  others  a  combination  of both.  In  general,  in 
recent years the share of gold OA scientific publications has increased compared to green OA 
publications. 

On  RDM,  policies  tend  to  have  been  introduced  more  recently.  Greater  coordination  and 
harmonisation  across countries is  still needed. Financial and technical  challenges relating to 
the  storage  and  available  data  formats  remain  key  challenges  to  the  further  development  of 
open access to research data. 

17 Revised in April 2018. 
18 Technical report, Table 18. 
19 Technical report, page 86. 

9 

 
 
                                                           
While  the  transition  to  an  open  science  environment  has  started,  it  is  still  hindered  by  a 
number of issues related to copyright, costs, data privacy, perception of lower quality of OA 
journals,  insufficient  training  on  OA  and  institutional  policies  that  encourage  publication  in 
traditional journals. 

Conclusion 

Swift progress has been made on open access to publications in recent years, which includes 
the introduction of legal measures. However, obstacles remain, including the varying degrees 
of  rule  enforcement.  There  is  also  an  assortment  of  national  approaches  to  open  access  to 
research  data,  a  domain  in  which  progress  has  been  much  slower.  A  number  of  challenges 
remain, preventing a wholesale move to an open science environment. 

2.6. 

International cooperation 

Objective: 

To ensure that Europe as a whole is able to take maximum advantage of the best research and 
innovation opportunities in a global setting. 

Deliverables: 

Defining  national  strategies  for  internationalisation  to  foster  stronger  cooperation  with  key 
third countries, better coordination of objectives and activities of the EU, Member States and 
Associated Countries towards non-EU countries and international organisations, better uptake 
of  the  results  of  multilateral  EU  and  intergovernmental  projects  and  better  use  of  bi-  and 
multilateral agreements between EU Member States and international partner countries. 

Since the 2016 ERA Progress Report, EU Member States have experienced small but steady 
increases  in  co-publications  with  non-ERA  countries.  Average  annual  growth  rates  in  these 
countries were 4.4 % in 2014-2016 and 4.2 % from 2007 to 201620. 

ERA countries employ different tools to promote international cooperation. These range from 
establishing bilateral agreements and dedicated research and innovation centres to appointing 
R&I advisors and specialists in their consulates and embassies worldwide. A number of ERA 
countries have also adopted national strategies for science and technology internationalisation 
or  emphasised  international  cooperation  in  their  national  R&I  documents.  In  addition,  both 
research  performing  organisations  and  research  funding  organisations  are  increasingly 
pursuing bilateral or multilateral cooperation opportunities with partner country organisations. 

The international mobility of researchers is actively promoted at both EU and national level. 
At  EU  level,  EURAXESS  as  well  as  the  Marie  Sklodowska-Curie  actions  are  the  key 
programmes.  ERA  countries,  especially  those  with  less  developed  R&I  systems,  promote 
incoming mobility more actively to address their lack of human resources. 

20 Technical report, Table 28. 

10 

 
 
                                                           
Despite  many  positive  developments,  several  challenges  remain  across  all  ERA  countries. 
These include a lack of financial and human resources dedicated to establishing and managing 
international partnerships. 

Conclusion 

In  general,  the  extent  of  international  cooperation  activities  between  ERA  and  non-ERA 
countries is on the rise. Countries with more developed R&I systems have more collaboration 
opportunities, and they are also better equipped to sustain and initiate new partnerships. There 
is a particular need to facilitate international brain circulation by creating a more diverse set of 
incentives. ERA countries need to increase their efforts to attract the best international talent 
so they can overcome labour shortages, strengthen research capabilities, boost innovation and 
deal with grand challenges. 

3.  CONCLUSIONS 

Compared  to  the  previous  reporting  period21,  progress  towards  the  ERA  priorities  has 
continued across the majority of the headline indicators albeit at a slower rate. In terms of EU-
28 averages, most headline indicators still show progress over time, although large disparities 
persist between  countries in terms of both performance levels22 and growth rates (see Table 
1). 

The wide variation in national progress between countries indicates that there is considerable 
room  for  further  progress  on  all  priorities.  ERA  ‘top  scores’  could  be  used  as  potential 
benchmarks for countries that are not performing as well. 

The fact that 28 countries have developed and published ERA National Action Plans is proof 
of  the  joint  political  ownership  and  mobilisation  on  all  ERA  priorities.  These  plans  show  a 
high level of ambition to make further progress on ERA. 

In  general,  the  emerging  picture  is  that  the  2015-2020  ERA  Roadmap  continues  to  be  an 
influential  tool  for  helping  Member  States  and  Associated  Countries  define,  align  and 
implement the necessary ERA reforms at national level. 

At the same time, the slowing of progress on ERA headline indicators calls for reflection on 
how to accelerate, strengthen and encourage implementation on all ERA priorities. This is the 
joint responsibility of all Member States, Associated Countries and the EU. 

More  systematic  use  of  the  jointly  developed  ERA  monitoring  mechanism  could  strengthen 
the  impact  and  convergence  of  ERA  National  Action  Plans.  This  could  be  supported  by 

21  For  a  comparison  of  the  headline  indicators’  growth  rates  with  the  previous  reporting  period,  see  ERA 
Progress 
http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/pdf/era_progress_report2016/ 
Report 
era_progress_report_2016_com.pdf. 
22 See technical report. 

2016 

at 

11 

 
 
                                                           
mutual learning exercises like the Policy Support Facility23 coupled with strategic debates in 
ERAC, and taking into account the European Semester. 

As new challenges arise, European and national authorities need to coordinate and adapt their 
policy response to old obstacles and new opportunities. This implies that ERA priorities will 
evolve over time.  There  is  clear added value for all in  building a modern and agile ERA in 
close  partnership  with  Member  States,  Associated  Countries,  the  Commission  and  all  ERA 
stakeholders.  The  proposed  EU  long-term  budget  is  designed  to  provide  incentives  and 
support  in  order  to  jointly  improve  national  R&I  systems  and  advance  the  ERA. 

23 https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/policy-support-facility. 

12 

 
 
                                                           
Table 1. Overview of growth rates of ERA headline indicators   

Country 

JRC Res 
Excellence 
(2013-2016) 

GBARD 
transnat 
(2014-2016) 

EURAXESS 
job postings 
(2014-2016) 

Women Grade A 
(2014-2016) 

Innovative firms coop 
with univ. 
(2012-2014) 

Innovative firms coop 
with res. inst. 
(2012-2014) 

Non-ERA pubs 
per 1000 res 
(2014-2016) 

Headline indicators 

EU-28 

3.2 % 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CH 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

EL 

ES 

FI 

FR 

HR 

HU 

IE 

IS 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

MT 

NL 

NO 

PL 

PT 

RO 

RS 

SE 

SI 

SK 

UK 

8.1 % 

3.0 % 

-0.1 % 

-0.5 % 

3.2 % 

3.2 % 

2.6 % 

7.1 % 

4.6 % 

-1.9 % 

3.5 % 

2.9 % 

3.3 % 

7.1 % 

3.6 % 

7.0 % 

0.0 % 

3.6 % 

4.4 % 

9.7 % 

3.3 % 

17.3 % 

4.6 % 

8.2 % 

4.2 % 

6.0 % 

3.5 % 

2.6 % 

4.8 % 

-0.1 % 

5.6 % 

1.0 % 

3.9 % 

-0.6 % 

-4.5 % 

-19.5 % 

: 

-2.6 % 

12.7 % 

6.3 % 

-7.1 % 

17.4 % 

-21.5 % 

9.2 % 

2.0 % 

: 

-22.6 % 

112.3 % 

-16.6 % 

: 

0.8 % 

-5.4 % 

9.6 % 

-8.8 % 

33.2 % 

-1.2 % 

-2.5 % 

: 

21.0 % 

24.3 % 

: 

1.8 % 

22.3 % 

125.8 % 

5.1 % 

-5.0 % 

-4.0 % 

21.2 % 

-61.4 % 

: 

20.1 % 

-10.2 % 

85.5 % 

13.3 % 

-18.0 % 

-44.7 % 

19.9 % 

169.9 % 

8.7 % 

12.8 % 

31.9 % 

-35.6 % 

0.4 % 

21.9 % 

21.3 % 

42.6 % 

65.7 % 

: 

4.3 % 

6.1 % 

1.7 % 

-5.4 % 

19.9 % 

-49.5 % 

-43.8 % 

-9.0 % 

-9.3 % 

-10.5 % 

0.7 % 

2.1 % 

-1.6 % 

-7.7 % 

: 

13.3 % 

-8.4 % 

-0.6 % 

1.9 % 

15.9 % 

-27.8 % 

2.9 % 

-6.2 % 

2.5 % 

-26.2 % 

-17.6 % 

-4.7 % 

: 

12.3 % 

-35.0 % 

25.3 % 

-2.9 % 

-10.3 % 

14.7 % 

5.5 % 

0.2 % 

-1.5 % 

57.5 % 

138.8 % 

-6.7 % 

-11.5 % 

0.2 % 

-1.8 % 

4.0 % 

-2.5 % 

2.4 % 

-19.2 % 

: 

-4.5 % 

-0.5 % 

: 

-21.2 % 

47.0 % 

-35.9 % 

13.7 % 

-11.6 % 

2.2 % 

-34.3 % 

-12.0 % 

: 

: 

16.7 % 

-33.0 % 

16.5 % 

-11.1 % 

31.3 % 

: 

-0.5 % 

7.3 % 

-12.8 % 

4.0 % 

: 

: 

: 

6.1 % 

7.8 % 

1.0 % 

5.7 % 

5.5 % 

2.2 % 

6.6 % 

-4.7 % 

2.2 % 

4.1 % 

6.9 % 

3.3 % 

2.9 % 

0.7 % 

2.6 % 

-4.6 % 

2.3 % 

12.4 % 

-10.0 % 

: 

2.0 % 

9.7 % 

: 

6.3 % 

-22.6 % 

5.0 % 

3.1 % 

3.0 % 

1.3 % 

22.3 % 

: 

4.2 % 

7.6 % 

0.1 % 

: 

13 

4.4 % 

5.0 % 

0.7 % 

2.8 % 

: 

9.8 % 

5.6 % 

1.2 % 

8.5 % 

6.3 % 

6.9 % 

5.9 % 

11.0 % 

-0.3 % 

-0.7 % 

3.8 % 

-13.2 % 

1.2 % 

3.4 % 

7.5 % 

-3.8 % 

35.5 % 

15.5 % 

3.8 % 

0.5 % 

2.4 % 

4.3 % 

8.4 % 

-1.0 % 

4.9 % 

8.1 % 

9.0 % 

6.6 %