COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION of the Research and Technological Development (RTD) infrastructures and activities supported by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in the period 2007-2013
Date: 2023-03-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission
Subjects: EU research policy, European Regional Development Fund, innovation, investment, operational programme, research and development, research infrastructure, research staff, technological change

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 24.3.2023  SWD(2023) 72 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION  of the    Research and Technological Development (RTD) infrastructures and activities supported by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in the period 2007-2013 {SWD(2023) 71 final}  
 
 
1.  Context and scope 

The  European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Regional  and  Urban  Policy,  drafted  a  staff 
working  document  to  report  on  the  results  of  the  ex-post  evaluation  of  investment  in  research  and 
technological  development  (RTD)  infrastructures  and  activities supported  by  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund  (ERDF)  in  the  period  2007-2013.  The  evaluation  study  was  conducted  by  an 
external contractor and the final report was published1 in December 20212. 

In  the  period  2007-2013,  over  EUR  86  billion,  nearly  25%  of  total  Cohesion  Policy  funding,  went 
towards  innovation  in  the  broader  sense.  Looking  at  RTD  specifically,  some  EUR  17  billion  was 
invested  under  the  ERDF  through  215  operational  programmes  (OP)  in  projects  supporting  RTD 
infrastructure,  competence  centres  and  activities  in  Member  States  and  regions.  Of  these  resources, 
more  than  EUR  11  billion  supported  the  construction  of  new  infrastructure,  the  modernisation  of 
existing infrastructure, and equipment purchase. The remaining almost EUR 6 billion was invested in 
other forms of support to research activities.  

Operational programmes highlighted two main groups of investment needs: a lack of a critical mass of 
infrastructure  endowments  and  research  capacities  to  enable  the  production  of  top-class  research 
(relevant  in  particular  for  EU133)  and  a  need  to  increase  the  industrial  relevance  of  the  regional 
science  base  by  linking  existing  or  emerging  poles  of  scientific  excellence  to  areas  of  industrial 
strength.  

Between 2007 and 2017, the average growth rate in the number of research and development (R&D) 
personnel  and  researchers  in  the  regions  receiving  ERDF  support  was  40%,  and  average  regional 
ERDF  expenditure  on  infrastructures  and  R&D  projects  in  higher  education  institutions  was  about 
EUR 35 million. Over the same period, scientific publications almost doubled in terms of volume over 
the EU as a whole, but the EU13 regions experienced a higher growth rate as compared with regions 
in the EU154 (145% against 96%), highlighting an ongoing catching-up process. The observed growth 
rate  in  the  share  of tertiary-educated  people  in  the  target  regions  was,  on  average,  7%  in the  period 
2007-2017,  from  a  minimum  of  -5%  in  the  German  region  of  Chemnitz  (DED1)  to  a  maximum  of 
18% in the region of Prague (CZ01). 

The average value growth rate in the number of patents in the period 2008–2016 in the target regions 
was 48%. Looking at the two extremes of the distribution of the growth rate, four regions, located in 
Poland and Romania, experienced an increase in the number of patents higher than 500%, while a set 
of regions, located mainly in the EU15, recorded negative growth rates. The growth rate in the number 
of public - private co-publications in the period 2008 – 2015 followed a similar path. 

1  https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/evaluations/2021/evaluation-of-investments-
in-research-and-technological-development-rtd-infrastructures-and-activities-supported-by-the-european-
regional-development-funds-erdf-in-the-period-2007-2013 

2  The analysis and conclusions are based on the analysis of 53 operational programmes (OPs) out of the total of 
215  OPs  funded  by  the  ERDF  and  covering  18  Member  States  out  of  28  as  well  as  85%  of  the  total  RTD 
investments financed by the ERDF. 

3  EU13 comprises the following Member States: Czechia, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, 

Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Croatia. 

4  EU15  comprises  the  following  Member  States:  Austria,  Belgium,  Denmark,  Finland,  France,  Germany, 

Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. 

1 

 
 
                                                           
2.  Findings 

Effectiveness 

The evaluation has shown evidence that ERDF investments, aimed at modernising education facilities, 
have contributed to increasing  both the number of  people with tertiary education and the number of 
tertiary-educated people employed in science and technology. Evidence also points to an increase in 
scientific publications as a result of ERDF support. Some positive results were also reported in terms 
of  softer  innovation  aspects  measured  by  the  growth  rate  of  EU  trademark  applications.  Positive 
effects  were  also  reported  regarding  the  managerial  capacity  of  research  institutions  and  the 
enhancement of their research and innovation capacities. 

The  evaluation  has  shown  no  evidence  that  ERDF  support  was  successful  in  stimulating  business 
R&D, which is the main driver of technological outputs. The capacity to generate economic benefits 
from  the  commercial  valorisation  of  R&D  results  and  to  increase  knowledge  transfer  capacities  and 
mechanisms  from  scientific  to  industry  partners  was  also  limited.  Expected  results  in  terms  of 
consolidation of research partnerships showed limited sustainability in the long run. The ERDF was 
also  less  effective  in  facilitating  coordination  and  interactions  between  all  actors  involved  in  the 
innovation ecosystem. 

Efficiency 

ERDF  RTD  investments  were  geographically  concentrated:  more  than  50%  of  mapped  funds  were 
invested  in  Poland,  Germany  and  Czechia,  70%  were  directed  to  convergence  regions  and  64%  to 
urban areas. ERDF support for RTD was overall sufficiently concentrated to lead to upgrades in both 
the  quality  of  research  infrastructure  and  research  management  capacities  in  most  of  the  countries 
examined. 

Some  implementation  issues  may  have  led  to  inefficiencies.  This  was  mainly  related  to  limited 
administrative capacity or an unclear legal framework, as reported especially for collaborative R&D. 
Uncertainties  in  the  interpretation  and  application  of  rules,  especially  for  what  concerns  State-aid 
rules, caused delays and generated confusion and adjustments during the implementation process. 

The  long-term  financial  sustainability  of  RTD  infrastructures  was  challenging  in  some  cases.  The 
limited use  of  infrastructure  by  the  private sector  and  external  users  made  the infrastructures  highly 
dependent  on  public  funding  for  their  operation  and  maintenance.  The  case  studies  confirm  that 
collaborative  R&D  policy instruments  were  not  fully  successful  in  ensuring  the  sustainability  of  the 
research  projects’  results,  stemming  from  the  lack  of  translation  of  research  results  into  practical 
innovations. 

Coherence 

The ERDF played a countercyclical role in many regions, preventing the erosion of R&D systems in a 
moment of severe cuts in public funding for education and research, given the economic downturn of 
2008.  The  ERDF  policy  mix  for  RTD  was  also  generally  coherent  with  regional  and  national  RTD 
strategies  but  was  mainly  driven  by  co-financing  obligations.  The  role  of  the  ERDF  in  shaping 
national and regional policies was stronger in those countries where it represented a significant share 
of national or regional R&D expenditure. 

Coherence  with  other  forms  of  ERDF  support  was  generally  high.  There  was  robust  coordination 
among  different  OPs  and  between  different  priority  axes  within  the  same  OP,  clearly  considering 

2 

 
 
possible  synergies  and  complementarity  of  respective  roles.  Good  synergies  were  reported  with  the 
European  Social  Fund,  with  specific  reference  to  support  in  the  higher-education  sector,  while 
coherence  between  cohesion  and  competition  policy  remains  unsolved.  The  ERDF  and  the  EU 
framework  programmes  for  research  and  innovation  were  seen  as  serving  related  but  essentially 
different purposes. Despite ambitions to build on complementary strengths, no specific arrangements 
were implemented to facilitate or promote active synergies. 

EU Added Value 

Managing  Authorities  highlighted  that  there  was  significant  added  value,  in  particular  in  the  EU13, 
where ERDF 2007-2013 programmes represented the first systematic set of interventions addressed to 
the research field, after years of underinvestment and limited political priority.  

EU-wide  effects  occurred  through  the  development  of  EU-level  research  communities  in  specific 
fields,  enabling  the  construction  or  upgrading  of  strategic  infrastructures  of  pan-European  relevance 
(as  confirmed  by  the  later  inclusion  into  the  European  Strategy  forum  on  Research  Infrastructures 
Roadmap) and also supporting the internationalisation of research communities. It helped structuring 
and consolidating a European Research Area by promoting the achievement of EU standards in RTD 
capacities and production. 

Relevance 

ERDF  support  appeared to  address  the  most  pressing  needs  of  expansion  and modernisation  for the 
national RTD systems and, in particular, the huge infrastructure gap of Central and Eastern European 
countries.  However,  the  ERDF  support  also  reflected  the  need  to  improve  science-industry 
collaboration,  mainly  in  more  advanced  regions.  Overall,  ERDF  support  to  RTD  investments 
concentrated  on  interventions  on  the  supply  side,  mainly  focused  on  strengthening  RTD  capacities 
rather than on improving the performance of regional RTD systems as a whole. 

Most  RTD  interventions  were  geared  at  supporting  excellence  objectives.  ERDF  prioritisation 
strategies targeted territories/institutions/sectors with significant potential or comparative advantages. 
When the distribution of ERDF support was not geographically driven by eligibility criteria, such as in 
national  OPs  in  Central  and  Eastern  Europe,  ERDF  expenditure  was  mainly  concentrated  in  urban 
areas, economically stronger sectors and more competitive institutions and organisations. 

3.  Conclusions 

Overall,  ERDF  support  has  positively  contributed  to  the  catch-up  process  of  RTD  capacities 
particularly  in  lagging  regions,  where  it  also  acted  as  a  key  buffer  against  a  general  decrease  in 
national public expenditure for RTD investments during the financial crisis.  

ERDF  investment  contributed  to  reducing  disparities  among  EU  regions  in  performing  quality 
research.  This  was  mainly  delivered  by  infrastructure  investments,  while  support  for  R&D  projects, 
both  individual  and  collaborative,  was  also  important.  As  a  result,  there  were  observable  effects  on 
scientific  production  and  capacity,  as  witnessed  by  some  key  RTD  performance  indicators:  the 
increase in the volume of scientific publications; the increase in the number of people with a tertiary 
education employed in science and technology; and the growth rate in the number of R&D personnel 
and researchers. 

The main drawback reported by the study relates to the lack of observable long-term impacts in the use 
of research results for technological development and innovation. Evidence shows that the improved 

3 

 
 
scientific  knowledge  did  not translate  into  technological  development and innovation  and  ultimately 
did not increase regional competitiveness. The findings also show that the support was not successful 
in stimulating  business  R&D  and encouraging  industrial  and  commercial  application  of  the research 
results. The evidence shows that synergies and complementarity with other EU funding sources were 
not always well exploited. The evaluation concludes that support to RTD infrastructures and activities 
alone may not be sufficient to achieve a noticeable shift in technological capacity. Other supporting 
factors, such as more place-based approaches, including comprehensive long-term regional strategies 
and sufficient administrative capacity may play an important role.  

The  subsequent  legislative  frameworks  introduced  a  series  of  innovations  to  address  the  underlined 
drawbacks,  notably  the  obligation  to  introduce  smart  specialisation  strategies  in  the  2014-2020  and 
2021-2027 periods. Smart specialisation strategies addressed these issues by stimulating coordination, 
concentration  and  prioritisation  of  funding  at  local  level,  having  a  stronger  emphasis  on  market 
orientation  (i.e.  higher  technological  readiness  levels)  and  greater  focus  on  capability  building  for 
regions  left  behind.  Among  the  most  ambitious  innovations,  a  notable  one  is  also  the  Interregional 
Innovation Investments Instrument, which aims at supporting interregional innovation projects in their 
commercialisation and scale-up phases. 

In addition, the 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 periods have also seen  a progressive  improvement in the 
monitoring  system  for  financial,  output  and  result  indicators,  which  was  still  limited  in  2007-2013. 
Building on this, future evaluations, particularly the ex-post evaluation of cohesion policy programmes 
2014-2020, will continue to assess RTD investments5. 

5  https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/evaluations/ec/2014-2020/ 

4