COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Interim evaluation of PRIMA Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Interim Evaluation of the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA)
Date: 2023-05-31
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission
Subjects: Mediterranean region (EU), Mediterranean third countries, Union for the Mediterranean, food systems, innovation, research and development, research programme, scientific cooperation, self-sufficiency in food, water resources

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 31.5.2023  SWD(2023) 169 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Interim evaluation of  PRIMA Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Interim Evaluation of the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) {COM(2023) 285 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 

Purpose and scope of the evaluation/fitness check...................................................................... 3 

2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? ....................................... 4 

Points of comparison  .................................................................................................................. 8 

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATED PERIOD? ........................... 9 

Current state of play .................................................................................................................... 9 

Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda / Annual Work Plans ............................................ 10 

Funding system ......................................................................................................................... 11 

PRIMA implementation ............................................................................................................ 12 

4. 

EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) ....................................................................... 17 

4.1.  TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INTERVENTION SUCCESSFUL AND WHY? .......................... 17 

Effectiveness ............................................................................................................................. 17 

Efficiency .................................................................................................................................. 23 

Coherence .................................................................................................................................. 24 

Transparency and openness ....................................................................................................... 29 

4.2.  HOW DID THE EU INTERVENTION MAKE A DIFFERENCE? .................................................. 30 

EU Added Value ....................................................................................................................... 30 

4.3.  IS THE INTERVENTION STILL RELEVANT? .............................................................................. 32 

Relevance .................................................................................................................................. 32 

5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? ................................................. 37 

5.1.  CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 37 

5.2.  LESSONS LEARNED ........................................................................................................................ 38 

ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 41 

ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED ................................................... 44 

ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX AND, WHERE RELEVANT, DETAILS ON ANSWERS 

TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS (BY CRITERION) ............................................................. 47 

ANNEX IV. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS [AND, WHERE RELEVANT, TABLE 

ON SIMPLIFICATION AND BURDEN REDUCTION] .................................................................. 53 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

AWP 

EC  

ERA 

Annual Work Plan 

European Commission 

European Research Area 

ERA-Net 

European Research Area Networks 

EU 

EU PS 

FP 

GDP 

H2020 

IA 

KPI 

NFA 

European Union 

Participating EU Member States 

Framework Programme 

Gross Domestic Product 

Horizon 2020 

Innovation Action 

Key Performance Indicator 

National Funding Authority 

SM PS 

PRIMA-IS 

Southern Mediterranean Participating States 

PRIMA Implementing Structure – PRIMA Foundation 

PS 

PSIA 

R&I 

RIA 

SDG 

SMEs 

SRIA  

TFEU 

TTG 

Participating States 

Participant States Initiated Activities 

Research and Innovation 

Research and Innovation Action 

Sustainable Development Goal 

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises 

Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda 

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

Time to Grant  

2 

 
 
TTI 

TTP 

TTS 

UfM 

WEFE 

Time to Inform 

Time to Pay 

Time to Sign 

Union for the Mediterranean 

Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystem 

3 

 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose and scope of the evaluation/fitness check 

This  Staff  Working  Document  (SWD)  assesses  the  public-public  “Partnership  for 
Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area” (PRIMA), which was established by 
the Decision (EU) 2017/ 1324 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 
2017 (the Basic Act)1.  

PRIMA is an initiative created under Horizon 2020 (H2020), based on Article 185 TFEU, 
which enables the EU to participate in research programmes undertaken jointly by several 
Member  States.  The  main  objective  of  the  initiative  (2018-2028)  is  to  devise  new  R&I 
approaches  to  improve  water  availability  and  sustainable  agriculture  production  in  a 
region heavily affected by climate change, urbanisation and population growth.  

Set  up  as  a  public-public  partnership  between  the  EU  and  non-EU  Participating  States 
from  the  Southern  and  Eastern  Mediterranean,  PRIMA  currently  consists  of  19 
participating states (PS):  

  EU:  Croatia,  Cyprus,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  Malta, 

Portugal, Slovenia, Spain  

  associated: Israel, Tunisia and Türkiye 
  Non-associated to H2020: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco 

It  supports  collaborative  research  by  international  consortia  with  a  thematic  focus  on 
water,  agriculture  and  the  agro-food  system  as  well  as  the  interdependencies  between 
these fields through the Water Energy Food Ecosystems (WEFE) Nexus.  

The  dedicated 
the  PRIMA  Foundation  (PRIMA-IS), 
established in Barcelona, implements activities mainly in the form of calls for proposals 
in three sections: 

implementation  structure, 

  Section 1 calls: organised by PRIMA and funded exclusively by H2020  
  Section 2 calls: also organised by PRIMA but funded by PS 
  Section 3 calls: organised and funded by PS 

The current SWD aims to support the European Commission (EC) in fulfilling its legal 
obligation from the Basic Act (Art. 14). It covers the period from the implementation of 
PRIMA  in  2017  until  March  2022  and  mainly  focuses  on  the  partnership’s  2018-2021 
AWPs.  The  SWD  is  based  on  the  assessment  criteria  of  effectiveness,  efficiency, 
relevance,  coherence  and  added  value  to  the  European  Union  (EU)  as  well  as 
transparency and openness. It assesses in particular:  

 
 

 

the progress towards the objectives of PRIMA; 
the  Partnership’s  efficiency  (in  aspects  such  as  implementation,  governance, 
supervision and potential complexity); 
the  coherence  with  other  initiatives,  actions  and/or  policies  that  have  related 
objectives;  

1 Decision (EU) 2017/1324 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2017 on the participation of 
the Union in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) jointly undertaken 
by several Member States, (OJ L 185, 18.7.2017, p. 1). 

3 

 
 
                                                           
 
 

the PRIMA’s added value at EU and Mediterranean levels; 
the  effectiveness  of  the  Article  185  PRIMA  Partnership  approach  in  its 
domain/sector and its contribution to the general policy objectives of the EU and 
more specifically the Horizon 2020’s objectives.  

Since  none  of  the  projects  was  finished  at  the  time  of  the  assessment,  the  focus  of  the 
evaluation  lies  less  on  long-term  impacts  but  more  on  the  structure,  implementation 
processes  and  the  current  progress  of  the  Programme.  In  particular,  it  is  evaluated 
whether there has been significant progress regarding the specific objectives, as these are 
not  fully  dependent  on  the  exploitation  of  the  results  of  the  projects.  Nevertheless, 
tentative aspects of outcomes and impacts are addressed to the extent possible.  

The  data  collection  and  methodology  is  mainly  covered  by  the  Green  Transition  study, 
which  is  carried  out  as  part  of  the  2019-2024  R&I  FP  evaluation  strategy.  This  study 
follows the new evaluation approach that bundles and coordinates all evaluation studies 
on Horizon 2020/Horizon Europe. A qualitative  and quantitative information, such as a 
desk review and targeted interviews with selected stakeholders were included. Feedbacks 
received  from  other  stakeholders  in  the  context  of  a  call  of  evidence  that  run  from 
05/09/2022 to 03/10/2022 have been also considered.  

To  support  the  interim  evaluation,  the  Commission  contracted  an  external  interim 
evaluation  report2,  prepared  by  independent  experts  from  a  consortium  including 
Technopolis, Austrian Institute for Technology, Kerlen, Fraunhofer, Science Metrix and 
ZSI  Center  for  Social  Innovation.  It  is  based  on  various  approaches  and  sources.  The 
main input came from the PRIMA-IS. Its evaluation input report (PRIMA 2022) provided 
a detailed set of statistics, indicators and explanations of key developments. In addition, 
PRIMA-IS made available an assessment study that it had commissioned in preparation 
of this evaluation (CSES 2022). 

All  existing  documents  of  PRIMA,  e.g.,  Ex-Ante  Assessment,  Basic  Act,  Statutes, 
Website,  PRIMA  Intelligent  Analytical  Tool  (available  on  the  website),  as  well  as 
relevant publications for evaluations for public-public partnerships, have been reviewed. 
Overall, quantitative assessments (e.g. also via publication analysis) have been performed 
and complemented, as  far as possible, by qualitative insights.  After  analytical  work, 15 
interviews  with  diverse  and  key  representative  stakeholders  of  different  types  and 
geographical origins have been conducted.  

2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? 

Water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area are unsustainably managed 
in many cases. This challenge is being exacerbated by climate change and has important 
downstream  impacts  including  social  and  economic  stress,  instability  and  external 
migration. 

One  of  the  key  reasons  for  the  unsustainable  management  of  water  provision  and  food 
systems  in  the  Mediterranean  area  is  the  lack  of  a  set  of  common  innovative  solutions 

2  Evaluation  study  on  the  European  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation  for  addressing  Global 
Challenges and Industrial Competitiveness - Focus on activities related to the green transition –RTD/2021/SC/023 - 
Interim  Evaluation  of  the  Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area  (PRIMA) 
(forthcoming) 

4 

 
 
                                                           
that  are  adapted  to  the  local  realities  of  the  region  and  easily  transferable  across  it  and 
have been fully piloted and demonstrated on the ground3. 

These solutions are not forthcoming because the overall level of R&I investment in the 
Mediterranean  area  is  not  commensurate  with  the  size  of  the  regional  challenge. 
Investment levels differ greatly between countries, moreover funding is not well focused 
on  addressing  the  water  and  food  challenge.  Relevant  stakeholders  involved  –  for 
instance  private  sector  ones  –  do  not  always  have  sufficiently  strong  R&I  capabilities, 
and  the  R&I  and  collaboration  efforts  between  EU  Member  States  and  Southern  and 
Eastern  Mediterranean  countries  are  too  scattered  (mostly  governed  by  bilateral 
agreements) to have any significant impact. 

PRIMA was established to address the above-mentioned challenges. The drivers behind 
the  inadequacy  of  R&I  systems  in  the  Mediterranean  area  to  deliver  the  needed 
innovative  and  integrated  solutions  for  the  sustainable  management  of  water  provision 
and  food  systems,  as  identified  in  the  Impact  Assessment  accompanying  PRIMA 
proposals for a Decision of the European Parliament and the Council, are the following: 

  Uneven R&I resources in the Mediterranean countries. For instance, average 
R&D intensities measured as percentage of GDP in the region are low: 1.29% for 
the EU Member States participating in the PRIMA Joint Programme (compared to 
2%  for  the  Member  States  overall)  and  0.54%  for  the  Southern  and  Eastern 
Mediterranean  countries  (excluding  Israel,  for  which  the  R&D  intensity  is 
4.21%). 

  Limited  coordination  of  R&I  policy  programming  between  Mediterranean 
countries.  For  instance,  in  the  field  of  water  and  food,  more  than  17  different 
bilateral and 11 transnational R&I collaboration programmes have been identified 
as being in operation in the region in a not well-coordinated manner. 

  Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance. 
For  instance,  even  though  of  key  importance  for  the  rapid  dissemination  and 
valorisation  of  research  results,  less  than  10%  of  research  activities  in  the 
Mediterranean region are carried out by private actors. 

As  PRIMA’s  impact  assessment  stresses,  PRIMA  Joint  Programme  is  also  of  great 
relevance for a broad range of key EU policies.  

PRIMA fits clearly into the European Agenda on Migration and the Communication on 
establishing  a  new  Partnership  Framework  with  third  countries  under  the  European 
Agenda on Migration4. In this Communication, research is mentioned explicitly as one of 
the EU policies that may  have  a role to  play in  the wider context  of the discussions on 
migration and in the dedicated agreements that the EU is expected to conclude with the 
most  affected  third  countries.  Given  the  importance  of  agro-food  and  water  systems  by 
boosting R&I that addresses related issues, PRIMA might likewise contribute to lowering 
migration  pressure  as  it  improves  domestic  living  and  working  conditions.  In  addition, 
creating a trust-based relationship with the SM PS is very important for European policy. 
The  introduction  of  PRIMA  was  regarded  as  suitable  to  improve  EU-Southern 
Mediterranean relations. The partnership may thus contribute to the European objectives 
to tighten the bonds between the EU and its Southern neighbours. 

3 SWD(2016)332 PRIMA's Impact Assessment 
4a  new  Partnership  Framework  with  third  countries  under  the  European  Agenda  on  Migration  adopted  by  the 

Commission on 7 June 2016 (COM(2016)385) 

5 

 
                                                           
PRIMA  also  fits  clearly  into  the  EU's  efforts  to  achieve  the  post-2015  Development 
Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and more specifically, SDG #2 
"End  hunger,  achieve  food  security  and  improved  nutrition  and  promote  sustainable 
agriculture" and SDG #6 "Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and 
sanitation for all". 

The implementation of the SDGs directly connects the PRIMA Joint Programme to EU 
sustainability  policy.  There  are  strong  links  between  the  content  of  the  PRIMA  Joint 
Programme  and  that  of  the  Resource-efficient  Europe  Flagship  Initiative,  for  its 
environmental  dimension,  and  that  of  the  European  Neighbourhood  Programme  for 
Agriculture and Rural Development, for its international cooperation dimension. 

Finally,  PRIMA  is  relevant  for  the  implementation  of  EU  R&I  policy,  since  the 
development  of  deployment  of  innovative  solutions  for  the  sustainable  management  of 
water and food systems, is a key element of Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe and can 
support the Global Approach for International R&I Cooperation, thus contributing to the 
EU’s objective for a stronger EU in the world.  

According to Article 2 of the Basic Act, “the general objectives of PRIMA are to build 
R&I capacities and to develop knowledge and common innovative solutions from agro-
food  systems,  to  make  them  sustainable,  and  for  integrated  water  provision  and 
management  in  the  Mediterranean  area,  to  make  those  systems  and  that  provision  and 
management  more  climate  resilient,  efficient,  cost-effective  and  environmentally  and 
socially sustainable, and to contribute to solving water scarcity, food security, nutrition, 
health, well-being and migration problems upstream”.  

These overall objectives are in line with the priorities of H2020. From them follows a set 
of four specific objectives, which are listed in the same article: 

“(a) the formulation of a long-term, common, strategic agenda in the area of agro-food 
systems,  to  make  them  sustainable,  and  in  the  area  of  integrated  water  provision  and 
management;  

(b) the orientation of relevant national research and innovation programmes towards the 
implementation of the strategic agenda;  

(c) the involvement of all relevant public and private sector actors in implementing the 
strategic agenda by pooling knowledge and financial resources to achieve the necessary 
critical mass;  

(d)  the  strengthening  of  the  research  and  innovation  funding  capacities  and  of  the 
implementation  capabilities  of  all  actors  involved  including  SMEs,  academia,  non-
governmental organisations and local research centres”. 

The  achievement  of  these  objectives  relies  upon  the  establishment  of  long-term 
cooperation  and  upon  end-user  friendly  and  societally  affordable  solutions.  The 
intervention logic reported in the PRIMA impact assessment illustrates the links between 
the general objective, the problem definition, problem drivers and the identified specific 
objectives. 

6 

 
PRIMA  addresses  the  Mediterranean  region's  environmental,  sustainability  and  socio-
economic challenges by contributing to the development of its R&I ecosystem and better 
regional coordination and integration. Like other Article 185 initiatives, PRIMA thus has 
a  political  perspective  (policy  alignment),  and  a  programmatic  and  financial  element 
(programme  alignment  supported  by  funding  research  and  innovation  activities  with 
national and EU funds according to the AWPs). 

Among  the  different  EU  Research  and  Innovation  (R&I)  partnerships,  PRIMA 
constitutes a distinct initiative as one of its key  intentions is to integrate Mediterranean 
Third Countries into the European Research Area (ERA). It aims to ensure transparency 
and equality for all the participating partners. Recital 27 of the Basic Act specifies that 
PRIMA-IS “should aim to provide, through the annual work plan, an appropriate share 
of  its  funding,  approximately  25%  of  the  Union  financial  contribution,  reflecting  the 
commitments of Mediterranean Partner Countries to PRIMA, to legal entities established 
in targeted third countries considered to be Participating States.” 

While not spelt out explicitly in the Basic Act, PRIMA features a significant component 
of science diplomacy, i.e., “the use of science for foreign policy purposes”.  

To summarise, with its overarching goal to contribute to the sustainability and stability of 
the region, PRIMA aims to achieve multiple objectives. These range from thematic goals 
to  address  societal  needs in  the Mediterranean area and specific objectives that address 
advances  towards  an  integrated  European  and  Mediterranean  Research  Area  to  science 
diplomacy goals for the collaboration with the EU’s Southern neighbours. 

In the context of PRIMA, the following Impact Assessments were conducted: 

  EC (2015): PRIMA Programme Inception Impact Assessment 
  EC (2016): IMPACT ASSESSMENT - Accompanying the document Proposal for a 
Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the participation of the 
Union  in  the  Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area 
(PRIMA) jointly undertaken by several Member States {COM(2016) 662 final} 

7 

 
 
 
Points of comparison  

The  points  of  comparison  is  the  impact  assessment  (SWD(2016)332  final)  and  the 
specific objectives set therein.  

In  particular,  the  evaluation  compares  the  progress  made  with  regards  to  three  main 
problems identified in the impact assessment:  

  Uneven R&I resources in the Mediterranean countries  
  Limited  coordination  of  R&I  policy  programming  between  Mediterranean 

countries 

  Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance 

In  contrast  to  other  Article  185  initiatives  in  H2020,  PRIMA  has  no  legal  predecessor. 
While there have been partnerships between different national agencies in earlier ERA-
Nets, and initiatives towards the Mediterranean area existed, the incorporation of PRIMA 
as  a  public-public  partnership  on  the  EU  level  was  completely  new.  Key  activities  and 
expected  outputs  of  the  partnership  included  the  set-up  of  efficient  and  trust-building 
structures  and  procedures  in  the  first  years  of  its  establishment  to  pave  the  way  for 
successful working.  

As  none  of  the  projects  funded  by  PRIMA  has  finished  yet,  the  focus  of  the  interim 
evaluation lies less on long-term impacts but the structure, implementation processes and 
the current progress of the Programme. In particular, it was evaluated whether there has 
been  significant  progress  regarding  the  specific  objectives,  as  these  are  not  fully 
dependent  on  the  exploitation  of  the  achieved  results  in  the  projects.  The  specific 
objectives that PRIMA aims to tackle are: 

1.  the formulation of a long-term, common, strategic agenda in the area of agro-food 
systems, to make them sustainable, and in the area of integrated water provision 
and management;  

2.  the orientation of relevant national research and innovation programmes towards 

the implementation of the strategic agenda;  

3.  the involvement of all relevant  public and private sector actors in  implementing 
the strategic agenda by pooling knowledge and financial resources to achieve the 
necessary critical mass;  

4.  the  strengthening  of  the  research  and  innovation  funding  capacities  and  of  the 
implementation  capabilities  of  all  actors  involved  including  SMEs,  academia, 
non-governmental organisations and local research centres.  

The following table presents the baseline situation before the establishment of the 
PRIMA initiative and the criteria used to measure the progress towards the fulfilment 
of the above specific objectives 

8 

 
 
 
Specific Objectives 
Common long-term strategic 
R&I agenda 

Alignment of national R&I 
programmes  

Critical mass of actions and 
resources 

Baseline 
No single strategic agenda 
covering the water, agriculture 
and food areas in consistent and 
comprehensive manner – silo 
approach without exploring the 
interactions between those 
thematic areas 
Numerous, fragmented, 
uncoordinated and overlapping 
national research actions and 
programmes - Governance and 
policies not facilitating 
international cooperation 

Limited involvement of all 
relevant public and private 
stakeholders – limited resources 
for common strategic actions – 
low R&I intensity  

Strengthening innovation 
capacities 

Inadequate funding and limited 
capacity for developing 
competitive proposals, 
coordinating and implementing 
successful proposals 

Criteria of success 
Elaboration of a consolidated 
Strategic Research and 
Innovation Agenda (SRIA) 

Annual joint calls pooling PS 
national funds to support topics 
supporting the implementation 
of SRIA – National funding 
agencies are streamlining 
national administrative and 
financial procedures 
Mobilisation of a wide range of 
stakeholders, including SMEs, 
beyond high education 
organisations, especially from 
Southern Mediterranean 
countries, in proposals - 
Approximately 25% of the 
Union financial contribution, to 
legal entities established in 
targeted third countries 
considered to be Participating 
States. 
Mix of Research and Innovation 
Actions (RIA) and Innovation 
Actions (IA) in the annual work 
programmes – More than 100 
demonstration sites - Jobs 
creation 

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATED PERIOD? 

Current state of play 

The  Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area  (PRIMA)  was 
established in 2017 by nineteen Participating States (PS) and the European Union (EU) 
through  the  Decision  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  4  July  2017 
Decision/(EU) 2017/1324. 

The  19  PS  in  PRIMA  includes:  11  EU  Member  States  (Croatia,  Cyprus,  France, 
Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  Malta,  Portugal,  Slovenia  and  Spain),  3 
Associated Countries of H2020 (Israel, Tunisia and Türkiye) and 5 Third Countries from 
the  Southern  Mediterranean  area  (Algeria,  Egypt,  Jordan,  Lebanon  and  Morocco)  with 
whom  the  Commision  concluded  Agreements  for  Scientific  and  Technological 
cooperation setting out the terms and conditions for the participation in PRIMA . 

PRIMA  is  operated  on  the  basis  of  a  jointly  formulated  SRIA  comprising  operational 
objectives,  R&I  gaps  identified,  and  main  expected  R&I  results.  The  SRIA  is 
implemented through a succession of AWPs that are are developed and implemented by 
PRIMA-IS, following the approval by the Commission.  

9 

 
 
 
PRIMA-IS  was  established  with  the  partnership's  inception  in  August  2017  by  the 
PRIMA  Participating  States,  as  body  governed  by  private  law  with  a  public  service 
mission, under Spanish law. It is responsible for the partnership implementation. Figure 1 
describes a simplified version of the governance structure of PRIMA. 

PRIMA-IS  supports  the  PRIMA  Steering  Committee  and  the  Board  of  Trustees,  which 
consists  of  one  representative  from  each  PS.  The  EC  and  the  UfM  participate  as 
observers  on  the  Board.  In  addition,  a  Scientific  Advisory  Board  (also  known  as  the 
Scientific Advisory Committee), consisting of different scientists, provides input for the 
best direction of R&I efforts. 

Figure 1   PRIMA-IS overview 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

In  line  with  its  objective  of  science  diplomacy,  to  build  trust  among  the  PS,  PRIMA’s 
governance follows the principle of equal footing. Therefore, it applies principles of co-
decision,  co-financing  and  co-management  in  the  design/structure  and  operation  of  the 
governance bodies, in the evaluation panels' constitution, and within PRIMA secretariat 
staff. Approximately half of the staff comes from EU PS and the other half from the SM 
PS.  

Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda / Annual Work Plans 

The  PRIMA  programme  is  being  implemented  according  to  a  long-term  Strategic 
Research  and  Innovation  Agenda  (SRIA),  which  provides  the  vision  and  strategic 
direction  for  the  Implementation  of  the  Programme  and  is  the  basis  for  setting  out  the 
PRIMA AWPs. 

The SRIA defines three main thematic areas: 

1. Management of Water: Integrated and sustainable management of water for arid and 
semi-arid Mediterranean areas 

10 

 
 
 
2.  Farming  Systems:  Sustainable  farming  systems  under  Mediterranean  environmental 
constraints 

3. Agro-food value chain: Sustainable Mediterranean agro-food value chains for regional 
and local development. 

In addition, these areas' interconnections have been addressed through the WEFE Nexus 
theme since 2019.  

The  programme  is  implemented  via  AWPs,  which  outline  the  calls  for  proposals  and 
other activities envisaged for the upcoming 12 months. AWPs are elaborated by PRIMA-
IS, different governing bodies and in collaboration with the EC.  

The AWPs contain calls for each of the three thematic areas. Since 2019, there have also 
been calls addressing the WEFE Nexus issues. Here, inter-disciplinary research projects 
are  funded  that  aim  to  deliver  synergies  across  water,  farming  and  agro-food,  thus 
catering to the topics’ deep interconnection. 

Funding system 

PRIMA’s  total  budget  is  EUR494  million,  with  up  to  EUR220  million  coming  from 
H2020 and  EUR274 million from  national  resources from  the PS (to support  Section 2 
and 3). 

The Basic Act further defines that the EU financial contribution and the PS' contribution 
to PRIMA should be equal – under a particular ceiling - to achieve a high leverage effect 
and ensure a stronger integration of the PS programmes. 

To achieve its objectives, PRIMA has provided financial support mainly through grants 
to participants, in 3 sections, which differ in their origin of funding and management: 

Section  1  grants  are  funded  by  financial  means  provided  directly  by  the  EU.  While 
PRIMA-IS manages them, the evaluation and administrative processes follow the H2020 
rules. These calls require only a single joint application to PRIMA’s submission portal.  

Section  2  grants  are  funded  by  the  PS,  who  are  represented  in  the  successful  project 
consortia.  PRIMA-IS  manages  the  evaluation,  and  the  NFAs  are  not  involved  in  the 
process,  which  independent  scientific  evaluators  lead.  However,  after  a  successful 
evaluation  by  PRIMA-IS,  the  NFAs,  corresponding  to  the  beneficiaries  participating  in 
the winning consortia, take over the further administrative procedures that in accordance 
with  national  regulations.  This,  e.g.,  means  some  NFAs  require  two  applications:  one 
joint  application  for  PRIMA  and  one  application  for  the  respective  NFA,  after  the 
successful review by PRIMA. 

Section  3  contains  PS-led  initiatives  that  have  officially  been  evaluated  by  PRIMA-IS 
with the help of independent experts, as contributing to PRIMA’s objectives. These are 
mainly  Participant  States  Initiated  Activities  (PSIAs),  which  are  national  bilateral  or 
multilateral  research programmes implemented,  managed  and funded by the PS. PSIAs 
can be complementary to the activities funded through PRIMA calls for proposals. They 
either  address  research  gaps  not  fully  addressed  by  PRIMA  projects  or  target 

11 

 
organisations  such  as  small  and  medium-sized  enterprises  (SMEs)  that  in  some  PS  are 
not  eligible  under  Section  2  calls5.  There  is  a  specific  procedure  for  the  reporting  of 
national  programmes  to  PRIMA  to  ensure  coherence  with  the  goals  of  PRIMA  and  to 
confirm that programme implementation has taken place. In addition to PSIAs, Section 3 
also  consists  of  “Other  Activities”  implemented  by  PS  supporting  PRIMA.  Activities 
include capacity building, brokerage events, dissemination activities, publishing reports, 
mutual  learning  workshops  and  knowledge  hubs  (such  as  the  PRIMA  Observatory  on 
Innovation). 

PRIMA is currently running efficiently and there are no delays in the implementation of 
the AWPs and calls. At project level, delays in the signature of some grant agreements of 
projects  selected  for  funding  may  occur,  in  particular  for  Section  2,  mainly  because  of 
additional  constraints  at  national  level  or  because  of  the  lack  of  harmonisation  of  how 
NFAs  handle  project  administration.  The  pandemic  has  negatively  affected  PRIMA  as 
not only labs in the PS had to close down, but also the missing travel possibilities made 
project progress more difficult for the many projects that include field trials or demo sites 
across  the  countries.  Consequently,  PRIMA  projects  that  should  have  finished  in  2021 
had to be extended.  

Since  all  projects  were  still  running  at  the  time  of  the  evaluation,  the  solutions  to  the 
societal needs PRIMA seeks to address  are still to be awaited.  Data collected from 53 
projects that have passed their mid-term review indicate promising progress to achieve 
operational objectives. 

PRIMA implementation  

Directly after the setup of PRIMA-IS, the AWP and first calls were launched in 2018. In 
2018-2021,  four  calls  and  the  project  submission  selection  have  taken  place,  and  168 
projects have been selected for funding (Table 1).  

Table 1  

Submissions and funded projects in 2018-2021 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

Section 1 

Section 2 

Section 1 

Section2 

Section 1 

Section2 

Section1  Section2 

Submissions 

484 

396 

309 

178 

335 

161 

313 

140 

Number of Eligible 
proposals 

Not admissible and 
ineligible proposals 

Funded projects 

Success rate6 

456 

362 

278 

154 

315 

153 

298 

137 

28 

9 

34 

26 

31 

18 

24 

30 

18 

15 

8 

31 

13 

11 

3 

28 

2.0 

7.2 

6.5 

19.5 

4.8 

20.3 

3.7 

20.4 

5 PRIMA (2022): Input to the PRIMA Interim Evaluation. Report by PRIMA-IS 
6  Success  rate  is  defined  as  the  number  of  proposals  selected  for  funding  divided  by  the  number  of  all  the  eligible 

proposals evaluated 

12 

 
  
  
 
 
                                                           
Total number of 
partners 

Total funding in M 
EUR 

Average partners 
/project 

103 

215 

169 

248 

183 

268 

150 

235 

18 

11 

27 

8 

28 

9 

27 

8 

33 

12 

31 

8 

32 

13 

29 

8 

Average funding  
/project in M EUR 
Source: based on PRIMA (2022i 

2.00 

1.05 

1.50 

0.90 

2.20 

1.00 

2.90 

1.03  

Each year, there has been a high number of submissions. The interest is more elevated in 
Section  1  than  in  Section  2,  because  in  Section  2  different  NFAs  with  partly  different 
funding rules are involved and project volumes are smaller.  

Participation in calls has decreased in both sections over time. Potential explanations are, 
on the one hand, that the initiative was already known by the community when the first 
calls started and that these were rather broadly formulated. Conversely, in recent  years, 
the  topics  have  been  more  tailored.  On  the  other  hand,  the  interviews  that  took  place 
during the interim evaluation stressed the challenges of the administrative procedures in 
Section  2  and  the  limited  success  rates  that  may  have  deterred  potential  applicants. 
Success rates differ between the two sections. The success rates for Section 1 are below 
5%. Also, the success rate for Section 2 is rather modest but increased from around 6.6% 
in 2018 to about 20% in 2021.  

Overall,  there  are  53  Section  1  projects  and  115  Section  2  projects.  Whereas  there  are 
significantly more Section 2 projects, the difference in accumulated project funding over 
the  last  four  years  is  rather  small.  That  is,  Section  2  projects  are  considerably  smaller 
than  Section  1  projects.  For  Section  1  grants  starting  in  2021,  the  average  funding  has 
risen to around EUR 3 million. Section 2 projects are smaller: around EUR 1 million in 
2021.  The  number  of  beneficiaries  increased  in  both  sections  from  2018  and  2020  and 
declined a bit in 2021 (but above 2018). For both sections, it has been an explicit strategy 
of PRIMA to increase the average funding value because of efficiency considerations and 
to encourage participation in bigger projects.  

At  the  time  of  the  evaluation,  all  projects  were  still  running.  The  total  funding  for 
PRIMA,  including  EU  and  national  funding  (including  Section  3)  is  EUR  353  million 
from 2018-2021. The EU funds in Section 1 allocated to projects in 2018-2021 amount to 
EUR 110 million. In addition, the financial contributions allocated from PS to Section 2 
calls from 2018 to 2021 total EUR 114 million. Section 3 funding amounts to EUR 129 
million. 

Participation by type of beneficiaries 

Most  beneficiaries  come  from  the  public  sector.  Higher  education  establishments 
represent  the  highest  number  of  beneficiaries  in  PRIMA  (Table  2).  This  category 
includes  universities,  institutes,  laboratories  and  research  councils,  and  accounts  for 
41.3%  of  all  beneficiaries  from  2018  to  2021.  Other  research  organisations  represent 
28.8% of beneficiaries.  Private for-profit organisations account  for a bit less than 20%, 
most of them being SMEs. The majority of SMEs (57%) participate in Section 1, where 

13 

 
the share of private stakeholders is considerably higher than in Section 2 (43%)7. That is 
probably  the  case  because  in  Section  2,  not  all  PS  reimburse  costs  for  firms,  and  the 
budget-per-project is lower. The participation rate of private actors is the highest in the 
WEFE  Nexus  calls  (only  Section  1  calls)  and  agro-food  calls.  Most  private  for-profit 
stakeholders are from EU PS (~72%). 

Table 2   Participation by type of beneficiaries8 

Year/section 

Total 

Higher 
education 
establishments 

Research 
organisations 

Public 
body 

Private for- 
profit 
organisations 

Other 

Total  
(2018-2021) 

1571 

649 
(41.3%) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

318 

417 

451 

385 

130 

164 

179 

176 

Grand Total 

453 
(28.8%) 

By year 

101 

120 

138 

94 

By section  

51 
(3.2%) 

297 
(18.9%) 

121 
(7.7%) 

12 

14 

11 

14 

62  

78  

91  

66 ( 

13 

41 

32 

35 

Section 1 

605 

174  
(28.8%) 

144  
(23.8%) 

30  
(5.0%) 

176 
 (29.1%) 

81 
(13.4%) 

Section2 

966 

475 
(49.2%) 

309 
(32.0%) 

21 
(2.2 %) 

121 
(12.5%) 

40 
(4.1%) 

Source: CSES (2022) 

National Participation 

For  the  analysis  of  national  participation,  it  is  important  to  consider  that  a  key 
participation  rule  for  Section  1  and  2  projects  is  that  at  least  three  independent  legal 
entities collaborate. Legal entities shall be established in three different PS, of which: (i) 
at least one is from an EU Member State, or third country associated with H2020, (ii) and 
at least one is established in a Third Country bordering the Mediterranean Sea. 

7 PRIMA (2022): Input to the PRIMA Interim Evaluation. Report by PRIMA-IS  
8 There is different information regarding the numbers of beneficiaries in PRIMA (2022), CSES (2022) as well as in 
PRIMA  Intelligent  Analytical  Tool  (available  on  Website).  As  most  detailed  relevant  information  was  provided 
CSES  (2022),  this  data  was  selected  for  the  report.  While  the  other  sources  differ  in  their  number,  the  statements 
would be remaining the same. For the preparation of the final report PRIMA will be conducted to finally consolidate 
the numbers in Table 2. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Regarding  the  number  of  beneficiaries,  Italy  and  Spain  rank  number  1,  followed  by 
Tunisia and France (Table 3). Non-EU PS participants represent 38% of all beneficiaries 
in  Section  1  and  Section  2  calls.  Among  the  SM  PS,  Tunisia,  Morocco,  Türkiye  and 
Algeria in this order have the highest number of beneficiaries. 

The participation of countries differs only to a limited extent between the sections9. This 
is despite the significant difference in funding modalities: Section 2 is dependent on the 
amount  committed  by  the  PS,  and  hence  to  a  considerable  extent,  the  participation  is 
more or less ex-ante defined, while Section 1 is based only on EU funding with open and 
competitive calls. The interviewees indicated that the similar performance of countries in 
both  sections  might  relate  to  the  prominence  of  the  topics  and  cooperation  among  the 
Southern Mediterranean regions in some countries (e.g., Spain, Italy) and strong national 
activities to support national entities to participate in PRIMA.  

The participation of countries differs only to a limited extent between the thematic areas, 
with farming having a slightly higher participation rate of SM PS.10  

Coordinating  entities  are  mainly  from  EU  PS  (~92.8%),  probably  due  to  their  greater 
experience  with  H2020  calls  and  other  transnational  projects.  Moreover,  some  non-EU 
countries  may  face  operational  difficulties  due  to  their  economic  situation,  such  as 
limited operations in foreign currencies or administrative limitations. However, there has 
been a slight increase in coordination activities by SM PS. 

Table 3   Participation by countries 

Country 

Number of projects  Number of beneficiaries 

 Number of Coordinators 

Received  Funding in EUR  million 

(Section 1+2) 

EU Members 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Portugal 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Total EU PS 

10 

14 

89 

54 

69 

129 

2 

7 

51 

9 

18 

20 

144 

67 

116 

273 

2 

9 

83 

12 

120 

554  
(57.4%) 

230 

974  
(62.0%) 

- 

- 

15 

13 

15 

60 

- 

- 

9 

- 

44 

156  
(92.8%) 

2.1 

1.6 

21.6 

16.7 

17.4 

51.9 

0.3 

1.9 

8.4 

0.9 

36.2 

159  
(71.9%) 

9 PRIMA (2022): Input to the PRIMA Interim Evaluation. Report by PRIMA-IS 
10 PRIMA Intelligent Analytical Tool 2018-2021. Accessible via https://prima-med.org/who-we-are/prima-in-numbers/ 

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Algeria 

Egypt 

Israel 

Jordan 

Lebanon 

Morocco 

Tunisia 

Türkiye 

62 

56 

12 

17 

31 

71 

103 

59 

Third Countries 

85 

74 

16 

21 

40 

118 

154 

89 

- 

1 

1 

- 

1 

2 

2 

5 

7.4 

9.3 

2.6 

2.6 

5.6 

11.5 

12.7 

10.4 

Total SM PS 

411  
(42.6%) 

597  
(38.0%) 

12  
(7.2%) 

62.1  
(28.1%) 

Source: CSES (2022), PRIMA (2022) 

Regarding  financial  contribution,  SM  PS  received  around  EUR  62  million  or  28%  of 
total funds. Of these, EUR 35.9 million were obtained from the EU financial contribution 
budget  (Section  1).  This  presents  a  share  of  around  32%,  exceeding  the  target  share 
foreseen in the Basic Act of 25%. In Section 2 calls (national funds), non-EU PS received 
approximately 23% of funds, corresponding to EUR 26.2 million in national funds. The 
fact that the shares of funding for SM PS are lower in Section 2 than in Section 1 reflects 
the lower national financial commitments of SM PS in Section 2.  

Section  3  PS  invested  EUR  73  million  in  13  PSIAs  (Table  4).  Mainly  due  to  national 
Covid-19  containment  measures,  several  of  the  PS  programmes  included  in  the  AWPs 
were  not  implemented.  From  2018  to  2021,  13  PSIAs  out  of  53  initially  planned  were 
launched,  and  397  projects  are  running  within  the  13  PSIAs.  According  to  PRIMA-IS, 
most PSIAs relate to R&I activities targeting private companies to foster competitiveness 
by  developing  new  or  improved  products,  processes,  and  services  focused  on  fulfilling 
economic, environmental, and social challenges (PRIMA 2022). 

Table 4   Amounts disbursed to PSIAs by country 

Country 

Spain 

France 

Israel 

Germany 

Total 

Disbursed amounts in EUR 

70 228 808 

2 539 998 

554 500 

101 582 

73 424 888 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

Regarding  national  distribution,  four  countries  contributed  to  the  disbursed  amounts. 
Spanish  organisations  paid  most  of  the  corresponding  funding  (EUR  70  million), 
accounting  for  95.6%.  In  addition  to  these  R&I  activities,  Malta  and  Türkiye  have 
launched PSIAs (e.g., training workshops, mobility of researchers) in collaboration with 
other PS, aiming to strengthen participation and coordination of less represented PRIMA 
PS and, in particular, SM PS11. 

11 PRIMA (2022): Input to the PRIMA Interim Evaluation. Report by PRIMA-IS 

16 

 
                                                           
PRIMA-IS is not only implementing the transnational calls, managing the distribution of 
EU  funding  to  beneficiaries  via  grant  management,  but  also  monitoring  the  projects 
selected from calls and coordinating operational reporting to the Commission. 

PRIMA monitoring 

To monitor efficiency, PRIMA-IS adopted a set of indicators from H2020, notably:  

  Time  To  Inform  (TTI),  i.e.,  the  number  of  days  between  call  closure  and  the 

announcement of the results, 

  Time  To  Grant  (TTG),  i.e.,  the  number  of  days  between  the  call  deadline  and  the 

signature of grants, 

  Time  To  Sign  (TTS),  i.e.,  the  number  of  days  between  the  informing  of  successful 

applicants and the signature of grants, 

  Time  To  Pay  (TTP),  i.e.,  the  number  of  days  between  the  signature  of  grants  and 

payment, e.g., pre-financing12. 

Moreover,  there  have  been  efforts  and  progress  toward  the  improvement  of  the  KPI 
system. However, current KPIs still leave room for improvement. In particular, it has to 
be ensured that the impact of projects will be monitored adequately, beyond the mid-term 
review or the end review of a project, i.e., some kind of regular monitoring or follow-up 
after the end of a project. A reference point could be the Annex V of the current Horizon 
Europe Regulation. 

4.  EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) 

4.1.  To what extent was the intervention successful and why?  

Effectiveness 

The  objectives  of  PRIMA  are  in  line  with  the  objectives  of  H2020  as  well  as  the 
objectives  set  out  in  other  EU  policies  and  programmes  and  are  visibly  defined  in  the 
Basic Act.  The PS have made clear financial  commitments to PRIMA.  They  consist  of 
either  in-cash  or  in-kind  contributions  and  are  stated  in  the  AWP.  The  documents 
reviewed  suggest  that  PS's  actual  individual  contributions  can  be  considered  as  an 
appropriate pooling of resources to foster transnational R&I. On average, around 80% of 
the committed funds in Section 2 were allocated later by the PS to PRIMA13. Only in a 
few cases, the PS did not allocate the full committed amount. This was mainly because 
there  were  too  few  successful  proposals  with  participants  from  the  respective  states. 

12 As other Art. 185 partnerships do not rely on the same indicators, the evaluation could not compare the efficiency of 
PRIMA to that of the latter. Despite the idiosyncratic nature of each partnership, it nonetheless seems advisable to 
liaise with other partnerships to devise a set of universal indicators in order to allow of comparison. 

13  Whereas  the  committed  amount  primarily  constitutes  a  non-binding  declaration  of  intent,  the  allocation  of  actual 

funds is binding. 

17 

 
 
                                                           
Moreover, PRIMA-IS stated to have invested large efforts to compensate for the missing 
funds.  

The  Commission  concludes  that  PRIMA  has  managed  to  set  up  an  effective  dedicated 
implementation structure. Corresponding procedures constitute a crucial testimony to the 
programme's  effectiveness.  Moreover,  the  stakeholders  acknowledged  the  efforts  made 
by PRIMA-IS (and individual national Ministries before PRIMA was set up) to secure a 
political and financial commitment from the PS who participate in the programme today. 
In particular, gaining the trust of the SM PS, most of which are unused to working with 
the EU under similar conditions, has been a major achievement of the PRIMA- IS so far. 

Regarding Section 1, the rather low success rates are an issue of concern as they imply 
high  efforts  for  a  large  number  of  actors  without  guarantee  of  funding.  This  may 
discourage potential applicants in the future.  

Considering  Section  2,  there  is  an  issue  that  each  year,  one  or  more  PS  are  ‘too 
successful’ insofar as national research teams form part of a large number of successful 
PRIMA grants.  This means that PS risk running out of budget without being able to co-
fund  their  share  of  all  successful  projects.  Consequently,  some  successful  PRIMA 
projects  risk  not  being  granted  funding  or  losing  partners  who’s  PS  cannot  provide 
funding.  As  a  result,  some  projects  are  awarded  funds  without  the  full  consortium  in 
place..  Section  2  poses  also  a  particular  challenge  for  more  vulnerable  PS,  which  have 
problems  meeting  their  financial  commitments,  e.g.  because  of  political  instability  and 
crisis.  Consequently,  realistic  participation  opportunities  for  beneficiaries  from  those 
countries are lower under Section 2.  

As  mentioned  above,  for  PRIMA  projects,  as  is  the  case  for  many  R&I  projects,  a 
significant  barrier  to  progress  has  been  the  Covid-19  pandemic.  Consequently,  all 
projects  that  should  have  finished  in  2021  had  to  be  extended.  The  pandemic  has 
negatively  affected  PRIMA  as  not  only  labs  in  the  PS  had  to  close  down,  but  also  the 
missing  travel  possibilities  made  project  progress  more  difficult  for  the  many  projects 
that  include  field  trials  or  demo  sites  across  the  countries.  Likewise,  another  relevant 
cause  of  delays  in  project  progress  has  been  the  lacking  harmonisation  of  how  NFAs 
handled project administration under Section 2.  

Data gathered for the 53 projects that passed the mid-term review (Table 5) indicates the 
“Total  number  of  peer-reviewed  publications”  (104)  and  the  number  of  products  and 
solutions  (81)  are  already  at  a  high  level  given  the  early  stage.  Moreover,  the  large 
number  of  demonstration  sites  (123)  presents  a  promising  sign  of  future  innovative 
solutions,  for  market  readiness,  and  user  involvement  in  PRIMA  projects14.  All  this 
shows progress to achieve operational objectives. 

14   CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

18 

 
 
 
                                                           
Table 5   Cross-cutting KPIs derived from projects having passed their midterm review_ 

Cross-
cutting KPIs 

Total number of 
publications 

Number 
Guidelines 

Number 
products 

Number of 
prototypes/pilots 

Number of 
solutions 

Number of 
new 
Methods 

Total 

104 

5 

38 

8 

43 

10 

Number of Jobs 
created 
(temporary jobs 
within projects) 

Number of 
Start-ups 
Created 

Number of 
Living Labs 

Number of Demo 
Sites 

Number of 
Platforms/ 
Hubs 

Number of 
Databases 

Total 

297 

3 

3 

123 

8 

10 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

PRIMA-IS has developed a set of KPIs to measure the contribution of PRIMA projects to 
the partnership’s thematic goals. However, it is too early to interpret these outputs at the 
current implementation stage, as they can be expected at the end of the project (Table 6). 

Table 6  

Thematic KPIs derived from 53 projects passing their midterm review in absolute numbers 

Thematic 
area 

Thematic KPIs 

Water management 

Farming systems 

Agro-food value 
chain 

WEFE 
Nexus 

Non-
Conventional 
Water 
Resources 
(NCWR) 
Applications 

Innovative 
Irrigation 
Solutions 

applied in 
project sites 

Agro 
ecological 
Principles 

Local Breeds 
improved 
and/or 
conserved 

Waste reduction 
& by-products 

 valorisation 
solutions 

Applied 
WEFE 
solutions 

Total 

2 

4 

3 

1 

10 

1 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

Another PRIMA KPI that is related more to input but connected to societal goals is the 
percentage of the EU financial contribution under Section 1 to climate and biodiversity-
related projects (Table 7). In line with PRIMA’s thematic objectives, the share of funding 
for  climate-related  projects  is  high  and  in  accordance  with  H2020  objectives  which 
requires a climate-related expenditure of 35% 

Table 7  

Sustainable development and climate change, including information on climate change-related expenditure 
2018-2021 

% Percentage of EU financial 
contribution that is climate-related in 
PRIMA Projects 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

2018 

32.2% 

2019 

35.4% 

2020 

42.6% 

2021 

34.4% 

For  achieving  broad  impact,  communication  and  dissemination  activities  are  important 
for  the  reputation  and  awareness  of  the  programme  and  the  diffusion  of  its  results. 
Therefore, there have been significant communication and dissemination activities by the 
projects themselves15 and by PRIMA-IS, e.g., projects Websites, dissemination material, 
and social media presence.   

15 PRIMA counts 676 events and activities for the projects. 

19 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
that 

According to the interviewed stakeholders, PRIMA has a positive reputation and is well-
known  in  the  Mediterranean  Area,  particularly  in  the  SM  PS.  However,  the  interviews 
indicate 
the  awareness  of  PRIMA  and  reception  of  dissemination  and 
communication  material  differs  between  countries  because  the  activities  of  the  NFAs 
differ.  Moreover,  it  appears  to  depend  on  the  role  of  beneficiaries  in  projects  to  which 
extent they receive information, as coordinators receive more information than others and 
do not always distribute it in the consortia. Moreover, projects are involved to a different 
degree in those activities, e.g., the Nexus projects are very much involved in events due 
to their more general and socio-economic related subjects.  

In  addition  to  general  (thematic)  objectives,  the  Basic  Act  provides  a  list  of  three 
specific objectives (see chapter 2), which are cross-cutting. Complementary to the above 
general assessment, the achievement of the specific objectives is assessed as follows: 

Specific objective 1 – Alignment16 of national R&I programmes 

The interviews indicate that there is strong political support for the aims and objectives 
of PRIMA17. The SRIA constitutes the key strategic document that supports the activities 
of PRIMA, and it seems well aligned with national and international R&I priorities. The 
geographical  scope  of  PRIMA  is  considered  a  strength  since  the  region  faces  many 
common  challenges,  which  are  addressed  in  the  SRIA  and  implemented  in  the  AWPs. 
Many  stakeholders value the flexibility that the SRIA  grants, allowing them  to  take up 
current  thematic  developments  and  challenges  in  each  AWP.  From  2019  on,  the  topics 
have  been  formulated  more  specifically  and  detailing  the  direction  of  research.  Hence, 
there  is  an  orientation  to  specific  needs  for  the  common  geographical  area.  The  topics 
selected  are  considered  appropriate  by  the  national  stakeholders  and  of  high  interest  to 
the  PS’  national  R&I  agendas.  Hence,  there  are  indications  of  alignment  toward  the 
SRIA.  

Moreover,  the  interviewees  consider  the  implementation  of  PRIMA  structures  and 
procedures  as  an  important  achievement.  Several  NFAs  changed  their  regulations  or 
administrative procedures with regards to Section 2 (see Efficiency). Nevertheless, these 
changes  do  not  only  benefit  PRIMA,  but  they  would  also  be  valid  for  possible  other 
transnational  activities as well. Beyond this evidence for aligning procedures, it proved 
more difficult to find indicators for the actual contribution of PRIMA to the alignment of 
national  R&I  policies  and  strategies.  This  issue  has,  however,  also  been  reported  for 
other  Art.185  partnerships,  so  it  appears  to  be  rather  generic  than  case-specific18.  The 
interviews  indicate  that  the  degree  of  alignment  may  differ  between  PS  because  of  the 
size  and  history  of  the  domestic  R&I  systems  and  procedures.  For  example,  countries 
with well-established R&I systems are more difficult to align. However, due to the close 

16  Alignment  here  is  meant  here  in  a  narrow  sense  according  to  the  specific  objective  of  PRIMA  regarding  the 
orientation  of  relevant  national  research  and  innovation  programmes  towards  the  implementation  of  the  strategic 
agenda.  ERA-Learn  platform  takes  up  a  broader  definition  of  alignment,  however  this  is  beyond  the  specific 
objective under subject here. 
https://www.era-learn.eu/support-for-partnerships/additional-activities/copy_of_alignment/financial-alignment-
case-studies    

17   CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

18 EC 2017: Evaluation of the Participation of the EU in research and development programmes undertaken by several 

Member States based on Article 185 of the TFEU, Commission Staff Working Document, SWD(2017)340 Final 

20 

 
                                                           
involvement  of  the  PS  in  the  drafting  of  the  SRIA,  one  may  assume  a  certain  level  of 
alignment between the thematic areas of PRIMA and their political agendas.  

Specific objective 2 – Critical mass 

Overall,  the  PRIMA  PS  feature  different  scientific  systems  and  baseline  situations  in 
terms of level of scientific excellence of their R&I actors. PRIMA has therefore, helped 
foster  scientific  integration  across  countries  that,  in  the  absence  of  PRIMA,  would  be 
unlikely  to  have  cooperated  as  closely  in  the  absence  of  a  clear  funding  incentive  and 
strategic framework to facilitate cooperation. 

PRIMA  thus  contributes  to  the  further  completion  of  the  ERA,  notably  by  overcoming 
the insufficient  cross-border cooperation in  the Mediterranean area through the funding 
of  cross-border  projects,  which  can  be  expected  to  yield  larger  impacts  than  uni-  or 
bilateral efforts alone. 

As already outlined, PRIMA has funded so far 168 projects19 with 1571 beneficiaries at 
an overall volume of EUR 224 million. With this, non-EU actors participated in 42.5% of 
all projects and accounted for 38% of all beneficiaries. The obligation to include at least 
one EU and one SM PS in project consortia is usually easily fulfilled with two or more 
partners  from  each  region.  The  SM  PS  can  receive  significant  funding  in  Section  1 
compared  to  the  lower  R&I  budgets  in  these  countries.  However,  the  number  of 
coordinators from SM PS is low. To tackle this problem, PRIMA supports beneficiaries 
from  SM  PS  to  train  their  cooperative  research  capacities,  e.g.,  in  terms  of  project 
coordination,  the  writing  of  high-quality  proposals,  or  cross-country  cooperation. 
Although  assumed  for 
the  European  research  ecosystem,  multilateral  scientific 
cooperation tends to constitute a novelty for researchers from some countries. Therefore, 
their  participation  in  PRIMA  projects  potentially  prepares  them  to  engage  in  more 
competitive  calls  in  the  future,  such  as  those  under  the  EU  Research  programs.  It  also 
constitutes a quality stamp important to R&I performing individuals and organisations.  

This strong participation from SM PS is crucial for raising critical research mass, and the 
interviewees  pointed  out  the  strong  scientific  capabilities  of  SM  PS  beneficiaries.  This 
can  be  expected  to  contribute  to  a  scientific  integration  across  the  Mediterranean  area, 
strengthening trust, inclusiveness and ownership. In addition, the gain in experience and 
the  build-up  networks,  resulting  from  participation  in  PRIMA,  promise  to  facilitate  the 
access of Southern actors to transnational research funding programmes in the future.  

The interviews also indicated that it was very likely that the established communities and 
networks  would  exist  beyond  the  project's  lifetime.  For  example,  one  NFA  stated  that 
some  members  of  funded  PRIMA  consortia  had  already  applied  together  to  other  bi-
national funding programmes. While the analysed data shows much cooperation between 
EU  and  SM  PS,  it  likewise  indicates  limited  cooperation  among  SM  PS.  Some 
beneficiaries  indicate that  cooperation between  actors in  certain  countries is  difficult  to 
achieve  for  political  reasons.  PRIMA-IS  continues  to  support  stronger  cooperation 
among SM PS in the future. 

19   Figures corresponding to Section 1 + Section 2 projects 

21 

 
                                                           
Apart  from  projects  under  the  umbrella  of  PRIMA,  additional  financial  and  in-kind 
resources  are  also  made  available  to  R&I  activities  through  Section  3  projects  to  build 
critical mass. Yet, there is little formal evidence of the use and effectiveness of Section 3, 
as  not  all  PS  tend  to  report  their  PSIAs.  A  reasonable  explanation  seems  to  be  that 
corresponding  PS  perceive  the  administrative  process  of  reporting  a  PSIA  as  complex 
and laborious (see Coherence). The H2020 regulations mandate the adherence to certain 
provisions,  like  verifying  the  legal  status  of  institutions  to  be  funded.  There  are 
indications that this discourages NFAs from reporting or assigning funding to Section 3. 
Moreover,  it  is  very  difficult  to  assess  to  which  extent  PS,  which  reported  their  PSIAs 
would  have  conducted  them  without  the  existence  of  PRIMA  as  the  EU  PS  mostly 
already had binational/ multinational funding programmes with Southern Mediterranean 
countries in the respective thematic areas. This limits the overall contribution of Section 
3 as a strategic instrument in its present form.  

Specific objective 3 - Strengthening of the research and innovation funding capacities 
and the implementation capabilities 

PRIMA  has  implemented  various  projects  aiming  to  develop  innovative  solutions 
through Innovation Actions and Research & Innovation Actions. Many of these potential 
solutions  are  piloted  and  tested  in  different  Mediterranean  countries,  addressing  joint 
regional  challenges  and  making  these  solutions  sustainable,  inclusive  and  transferable 
beyond the Mediterranean area. Hence, PRIMA tends to improve the capacities and  the 
performance  of  R&I  actors  to  contribute  to  more  climate-resilient  solutions,  e.g., 
reducing  water  scarcity  or  enhancing  food  security  through  improved  agro-food 
production techniques20 . 

In  addition  to  research  organisations,  a  significant  number  of  projects  also  involve 
industrial  partners21,  who  would  have  the  capacity  to  transfer  the  outcomes  of  PRIMA 
projects  into  marketed  products  or  services.  However,  the  participation  of  SMEs  very 
much depends on administrative and financing issues. Since some NFAs are not allowed 
to finance companies’ R&I activities, participation by SMEs in Section 1 is larger than in 
Section 2. Hence, the extent to which industrial partners are involved stems less from the 
perspective  of  opportunities  towards  exploitable  market  results.  This  may  be  a 
disadvantage for technology transfer in later development stages.  

Overall,  PRIMA  allows  especially  the  SM  PS  to  leverage  their  R&I  capacities.  By 
engaging in PRIMA, researchers from the SMPS gain access to the funding opportunities 
of  Section  1,  which  the  EU  finances.  Although  funding  under  Section  2  is  limited  to 
national  proportions,  the  section  nonetheless  allows  researchers  to  participate  in  larger 
consortia than under national funding. In addition, as mentioned above, participants also 
gain  experience  in  how  collaboration  works  in  EU  programmes,  thus  increasing  their 
chances for competing in other funding programmes, including Horizon Europe. 

20   CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

21 The high difference in private participation in section 1 and 2 makes it not straight-forward to assess the performance 
and  to put  in  relation  to other programmes.  According  to PRIMA-IS  itself  the  participation  rate is  considered  as 
reasonable:  This  SME  participation  is  comparable  to  other  EU  R&I  programmes  (see  for  example  the  Interim 
evaluation of Horizon 2020), mainly when R&I funding involving private entities is still an emerging concept under 
development in several PRIMA PS. (PRIMA 2022, p.98) 

22 

 
                                                           
Efficiency  

The Commission concludes, on the basis of this evaluation, that the PRIMA programme 
has been successful in achieving an efficient implementation of the partnership. PRIMA 
principles  and  procedures  appear  to  be  seen  as  fair  and  efficient.  Stakeholders  hold 
PRIMA  and  the  members  of  PRIMA-IS  in  high  esteem.  The  PRIMA  values  of  co-
ownership,  mutual  interest,  shared  benefit  and  the  principle  of  equal  footing  were 
considered particularly relevant to enable cooperation between the EU and its  Southern 
neighbours as equal partners. The work of PRIMA-IS is largely judged helpful, efficient 
and  responsive.  Thus,  the  programme  can  be  considered  a  relevant  tool  of  science 
diplomacy  that  helps  bring  closer  the  EU  and  its  Mediterranean  neighbours,  building  a 
sense of trust and inclusiveness. 

The work of PRIMA-IS can be considered rather efficient. Table 8 presents the values for 
the different indicators for Section 1 projects against H2020 target values. A ratio above 
100 can be interpreted as full target fulfilment and, an improvement of PRIMA values as 
an  increase  in  speed  and  efficiency.  Except  for  TTS  (Time  to  Sign),  PRIMA  performs 
better than the target values under H2020 (see table 8).  

Table 8   Comparison of PRIMA efficiency values for Section 1 to H2020 target values 

Efficiency KPI 

2018 

in days 

TTI 
TTG 
TTS 
TTP (rounded) 
Source: PRIMA (2022) 

133 
311 
177 
2.5 

2019 

134 
228 
94 
10 

2020 

H2020 target values 

66 
215 
14922 
11 

153 
245 
90 
30 

The  interviewed  beneficiaries  indicated  that  the  management  of  Section  1  was 
straightforward  and  good  to  handle  since  the  processes  adhere  to  the  application  and 
selection  rules  of  H2020.  Moreover,  some  valued  that  the  projects  were  smaller  than 
most H2020 RIAs or IAs, so they allowed them to work in smaller consortia, making the 
approach more targeted and thus more efficient.  

Conversely,  the  reviewed  information  suggests  that  efficiency  potential  remains  for 
Section  2.  This  mainly  results  from  divergences  between  PRIMA  and  national 
procedures.  For  instance,  as  laid  out  in  chapter  3,  some  national  provisions  require  the 
additional  submission  of  documents  or  applications  to  NFAs  after  a  positive  project 
evaluation  by  PRIMA.  These  may  even  differ  from  those  submitted  in  the  first  place, 
e.g., as some NFAs seemingly request submission in their official language(s). Similarly, 
national schedules may deviate from PRIMA schedules, e.g., concerning the processing 
of  applications,  which  may  lead  to  delays  in  project  implementation.  Such  limited 
harmonisation  implies  additional  administrative  efforts  for  all  involved  partners,  which 
means  consuming  resources.  Nevertheless,  although  challenging,  Section  2  is  an 
important  feature  in  PRIMA,  which  plays  an  important  role  in  mobilising  additional 
national resources. 

22 The spike in TTS for PRIMA in 2020 is supposed to be an artefact caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

23 

 
                                                           
Table 9  illustrates the efficiency  gap between Sections 1 and 2, comparing the PRIMA 
TTS  values  for  Section  2  to  the  H2020  target  values  and  the  PRIMA  TTS  values  for 
Section 1. 

Table 9   Comparison of PRIMA TTS efficiency values for Section 2 to H2020 target values compared to PRIMA 

TTS efficiency values for Section 1 

Efficiency KPI 

in days 

TTS Section 2 
TTS Section 1 

Source:  PRIMA (2022) 

2018 

552.5 
177 

2019 

356.5 
94 

2020 

H2020 target values 

195 
149 

90 
90 

In  response  to  the  difficulties  with  Section  2,  PRIMA-IS  has  been  actively  working  to 
streamline  procedures.  It  employed  different  activities,  especially  via  regular  Mutual 
Learning  Exercise  workshops  where  management,  funding  and  procedural  issues  are 
presented,  and  solutions  are  proposed  and  sought  with  NFAs23.  Moreover,  PS  have 
proven being open to adaptations, as the cases of Egypt, Italy, Jordan, and Spain show. 
These  countries  have  simplified  their  national  administrative  procedures  in  response  to 
PRIMA needs. Table 8 indicates the success of the joint search for improvements.  

This  constant  search  for  optimisation  is  another  testimony  to  the  overall  efficiency  of 
PRIMA.  

Yet, the adaptation of national legal regimes to multi-, supra- or international necessities 
or  the  conference  of  national  competencies  to  corresponding  entities  touches  the  very 
identity of states as  autonomous actors. The more so as SM PS tend to feature a lower 
experience of the sort of cooperation relevant to the EU R&I landscape. Lastly, national 
regulatory  set-ups  do  not  necessarily  follow  efficiency  considerations.  Consequently, 
improvements for the efficiency of Section 2 can only be rather slow and incremental. 

Concerning the different sections, there were indications that the efficiency of Section 3 
could be higher as well. Notably, the procedures for reporting PSIAs to PRIMA-IS might 
exceed the resources of some NFAs. This may prevent them from reporting their PSIAs, 
lowering the use of Section 3 as a tool to assess the alignment of national policies. 

Coherence  

Concerning  internal  coherence,  the  gathered  data  suggest  that  PRIMA  has  managed  to 
strike a balance in terms of the instruments applied and the topics addressed.  

For the different funding instruments, there are indications that the use of RIAs and IAs 
constitutes “a good mix”24 between basic research and research whose results could easily 
be translated.  

Projects related to farming systems accounted for the majority of projects between 2018 
and  2021  (Table  10).  As  agriculture  and  farming  are  important  for  communities  across 
the Mediterranean region, the benefit of focusing on this sector is particularly significant. 
Thus,  it  appears  reasonable  to  dedicate  the  most  funding  to  strengthening  its  R&I 

23  Topics  addressed  so  far:  Eligibility  check  procedures  alignment,  how  to  secure  commitments  and  payments,  the 
synchronization of  the  signature of  grants  agreements  to  beneficiaries  of  the  same  consortium  and  starting  dates, 
procedure to approve the extension time to projects requesting it 

24  CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

24 

 
                                                           
capacities,  increasing  stakeholder  involvement  and  developing  critical  mass.  Moreover, 
there have been indications of thematic links between projects under different topics. For 
example,  agro-food  projects  may  have  a  water  management  component,  as  water 
management  projects  sometimes  consider  farming  systems.  Hence,  there  are  no  hard 
boundaries between the thematic areas. 

Moreover,  the  addition  of  Nexus  projects  that  target  the  WEFE  Nexus  in  2019  can  be 
seen  as  a  further  step  to  harmonise  the  PRIMA  project  portfolio  aside  from  techno-
scientific silos.  

Table 10   Distribution of project numbers and funding volumes among the PRIMA topics 

 2018 

2019  

 2020 

2021  

 Total 

Share in Total 
2018-2021 in % 

Number of 
projects 

Amount of 
funding in 
EUR million 

(rounded) 

Farming 

Water 

Agro-Food 

Nexus 

 Total 

Farming 

Water 

Agro-Food 

Nexus 

 Total 

15 

12 

8 

0 

35 

19 

16 

11 

0 

46 

20 

10 

15 

3 

48 

23 

11 

16 

4 

54 

23 

9 

12 

2 

46 

28 

14 

16 

6 

64 

23 

6 

8 

2 

39 

30 

11 

12 

8 

61 

81 

37 

43 

7 

168 

100 

52 

55 

18 

225 

Source. Data compiled from project lists provided by PRIMA-IS 

48.2 

22.0 

25.6 

4.2 

44.5 

23.1 

24.4 

8.0 

Concerning  external  coherence,  PRIMA  shares  links  with  an  array  of  EU,  multi-  or 
international  political  and/or  R&I  initiatives  and  actors  (Tables  11  and  12).  While  this 
means an opportunity for harnessing synergies on the one hand, it raises the necessity for 
active  coordination  to  avoid  unnecessary  redundancies  on  the  other  hand.  To  do  so, 
PRIMA-IS  actively  engages  in  a  variety  of  activities  to  synchronize  with  the  most 
important  initiatives.  Moreover,  regarding  the  future,  PRIMA-IS  has  taken  steps  to 
coordinate with the Horizon Europe initiatives of similar thematic focus, such as the EU 
Mission “A Soil Deal for Europe” or the new partnerships like the European Partnership 
Water  Security  for  the  Planet  (Water4All).  Lastly,  PRIMA-IS  has  been  in  contact  with 
relevant  initiatives  that  could  facilitate  the  translation  of  PRIMA  results  into  practice, 
such as the EIT Food and the KIC Climate. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 11   List of the most relevant political initiatives and actors, their thematic links to PRIMA, and the activities by 

PRIMA-IS to coordinate with them 

Initiative Name 

Initiative  
type 

Thematic link 
with PRIMA 

UfM  

Political 

EU 
Mediterranean 

The thematic 
focus on the 
Mediterranean 
Region 

IEMed 

(European Institute 
of the 
Mediterranean) 

Political  

EU 
Mediterranean 

The thematic 
focus on the 
Mediterranean 
Region 

Type of activities PRIMA 
does coordinate with 
Initiative 

Aim of activities 

Joint workshops with UfM 
staff 

Better thematic 
coordination 

Co-organisation of 
conferences and major 
events (i.e. COP 27 
Pavilion) 

Joint webinars and 
conference 

 Better visibility for PRIMA 

Political  

International 

The thematic 
focus on 
water  

Collaboration WEFE 
Nexus Conference  

Political  

International 

The regional 
focus on the 
Mediterranean 

Joint meetings and 
webinars 

Better visibility for PRIMA 

Better visibility for PRIMA 

GWP 

(Global Water 
Partnership) 

UNSDSN 
Mediterranean 

(United Nations 
Sustainable 
Development 
Solutions Network 
Mediterranean hub) 

ASCAME  

Political  

EU 
Mediterranean 

The thematic 
focus on the 
Mediterranean 
Region 

Collaboration for the 
MedaWeek 
participation  

Better visibility for PRIMA 
and the funded projects 

(Association of the 
Mediterranean 
Chambers of 
Commerce and 
Industry) 

FAO 

(Food and 
Agriculture 
Organization) 

Political 

R&I 

International 

Activities 
addressing the 
same 
thematic area 

Sustainable 
Food Systems 

Joint workshops with 
FAO within the SFS-MED 

(Sustainable Food 
Systems in the 
Mediterranean) 

Better scientific 
coordination, regional 
focus in the Mediterranean 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 12   List of the most relevant R&I initiatives and actors, their thematic links to PRIMA, and the activities by 

PRIMA-IS to coordinate with them 

Initiative Name 

Initiative  
type 

Thematic link 
with PRIMA 

Type of activities PRIMA does 
coordinate with Initiative 

Aim of activities 

Water JPI 
(Water Joint 
Programming 
Initiative) 

R&I 

EU 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
area (water) 

Water JPI activities are open 
to PRIMA partners, such as 
the Water JPI Workshop at 
the Cairo Water Week  

Contribution to SRIAs  

Better scientific 
coordination 

in the definition of the 
priorities to be addressed 
in the AWPs to ensure 
complementarities and 
avoid duplications 

at the implementation 
level: to exchange best 
practices, avoid 
duplications and increase 
the impact 

 Joint Research 
Centre 

R&I 

EU 

EIT-Food  

R&I  

Education 

EU 

Activities 
addressing the 
WEFE nexus 
approach in the 
Mediterranean 

Co-organisation of the WEFE 
Conference 

Better scientific 
coordination 

Active contacts within the 
Governing Board of the WEFE 
Nexus Community of 
Practice 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
areas 

(Food, water 
scarcity) 

Training, sharing MOOCs 

Active contacts to identify 
potential cooperation 
opportunities in the fields of 
agriculture and water 
scarcity 

Joint webinars like the 
Rethinking Water Event  

EU Research 
FPs 

R&I 

Political  

EU 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
areas 

Synergies and transfer of 
knowledge among PRIMA 
and H2020 projects (e.g., 
Fit4Reuse and HYDROUSA) 

Build synergies in the area 
of education, training 
and capacity building 

Introducing and valorising 
EIT Online Courses on 
thematic related to food 
within the PRIMA 
community and network.  

Presenting to the PRIMA 
network of researchers of 
EIT Food’s 
education/training 
programmes designed to 
strengthen the 
entrepreneurial skills of 
key professionals such as 
researchers and 
innovators or strengthen 
farmers’ innovation and 
technology skills 

EIT could support research 
results of high TRLs 
produced by PRIMA 
projects to create start-
ups and commercialise 
their output. 

Better scientific 
coordination  

At the planning level: in 
the definition of the 
priorities to be addressed 
in the AWPs to ensure 
complementarities and 
avoid duplications 

At the implementation 
level:  To encourage 
coordination, exchange 

27 

 
 
 
Initiative Name 

Initiative  
type 

Thematic link 
with PRIMA 

Type of activities PRIMA does 
coordinate with Initiative 

Aim of activities 

Horizon Europe 
Missions 

R&I 

EU 

Collaboration in joint calls 

Synergies and transfer of 
knowledge among PRIMA 
and INTERREG MED projects 

Synergies and transfer of 
knowledge among PRIMA 
and ENI-CBC MED projects 

best practices, avoid 
duplications and increase 
the impact 

Thematic coordination 
extends the activities of 
the HE Missions beyond EU 
borders  

Better scientific 
coordination to 
encourage coordination, 
exchange best practices, 
avoid duplications and 
increase the impact 

Better scientific 
coordination to 
encourage coordination, 
exchange best practices, 
avoid duplications and 
increase the impact 
Transfer of PRIMA results 
through ENICBCMED 
capitalisation calls  

Joint workshops with CIHEAM 
within the Sustainable Food 
Systems in the 
Mediterranean (SFS-MED) 

Better scientific 
coordination, regional 
focus in the 
Mediterranean 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
area (climate 
change, inland 
water, soil 
health) 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
areas and same 
regional focus 
(Mediterranean) 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
areas and same 
regional focus 
(Mediterranean) 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
area 

Sustainable 
Food Systems 

R&I 

EU 

R&I 

EU 

R&I 

EU 

Mediterranean 

R&I and 
training 

International 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
areas and same 
regional focus 
(Mediterranean) 

Training workshops to 
increase capacity in writing 
R&I proposals 

Setting up of the PRIMA 
Monitoring, Evaluation and 
Learning Platform 

build research and 
innovation capacities 
and develop knowledge 
and common innovative 
solutions for agro-food 
systems 

R&I 
infrastructure 

EU 

Activities 
addressing the 
same thematic 
area 
(biodiversity)  

LifeWatch ERIC cooperates 
with PRIMA to tackle 
biodiversity and ecosystem 
research and sustainable 
management in a global 
climate change scenario. 
LifeWatch ERIC has been a 
valuable source of data for 
PRIMA projects and a place 
for storage and sharing of 
PRIMA data. 

Collaboration among 
PRIMA projects and the E-
infrastructure will increase 
the participation of more 
Mediterranean countries 
in LifeWatch ERIC, 
especially among young 
researchers. 

INTERREG-MED 

(European 
Cooperation 
Programme for 
the 
Mediterranean 
area) 

ENI CBC MED 

(European 
Neighbourhood 
Instrument 
Cross-Border 
Cooperation 
Mediterranean) 

CIHEAM 

(International 
Center for 
Advanced 
Mediterranean 
Agronomic 
Studies) 

ICARDA 

(International 
Center for 
Agricultural 
Research in the 
Dry Areas) 

LifeWatch ERIC  

(E-Science 
European 
Research 
Infrastructure 
for Biodiversity 
and Ecosystem 
Research)  

The reviewed information suggests that PRIMA is mostly complementary to the rest of 
the  Mediterranean  R&I  ecosystem.  For  example,  the  EU  research  and  innovation  FPs 
constitute  the  most  important  initiatives  regarding  R&I.  Yet,  while  they  may  address 
similar  topics,  they  do  not  particularly  cater  to  the  needs  of  the  Mediterranean  region. 
While filling this gap, PRIMA has been building  on activities from  the  FP at  the same 

28 

 
 
time. Similarly, PRIMA  complements  the Water  JPI25, which focuses  on all  of the EU, 
including  its  non-Mediterranean  member  states.  The  same  applies  to  other  initiatives 
such  as  the  Interreg  Euro-MED  2021-2027  Programme  or  the  ENI  CBC  MED 
Programme 2014-2020, whose foci, while in the Mediterranean, differ from the eligible 
actors or the funding conditions.  

In addition, PRIMA contributes with its thematic focus to the wider EU policies such as 
the European Green Deal26, the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change27, the 
Farm to Fork Strategy28, the Circular Economy Action Plan29, the Zero pollution Action 
Plan30, the Soil Strategy for 203031, and the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD)32. 

In  contrast  to  the  multi-  or  international  level,  meaningful  data  about  the  degree  of 
alignment  between  PRIMA  and  national/regional  initiatives  or  policies  are  difficult  to 
obtain.  Nonetheless,  the  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services33  reports  that  some 
countries support initiatives complementary to PRIMA. Moreover, the researchers point 
out that before the inception of PRIMA, the 4PRIMA Coordination and Support Action 
project, which ran from 2016 to 2018, specifically addressed the question of alignment of 
national strategies and research programmes on food systems and water use in the Euro-
Mediterranean  Area  with  the  PRIMA  priorities.  For  this  purpose,  the  project  involved 
major stakeholders in its activities to develop national strategies from the very beginning. 

Overall, PRIMA has thus managed to establish internal and external coherence well. 

Transparency and openness 

Overall,  PRIMA  has  developed  transparent  processes  for  consulting  stakeholders  and 
identifying priorities in each of its core activities. This includes the preparation of calls 
for proposals, the development of support actions and the organisation of networking and 
outreach activities.  

National  stakeholders  are  consistently  consulted  as  members  of  the  PRIMA  governing 
bodies.  In  particular,  regular  Board  of  Trustees  meetings  provide  the  opportunity  to  all 
PS to participate in key decisions and put forward their opinions, priorities and concerns. 

25 Water Joint Programming Initiative: http://www.waterjpi.eu/ 
26 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en 
27 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  Forging  a  climate-resilient  Europe  -  the  new  EU  Strategy  on 
Adaptation to Climate Change, COM/2021/82 final 

28 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-
friendly food system, COM/2020/381 final 

29 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  A  new  Circular  Economy  Action  Plan  For  a  cleaner  and  more 
competitive Europe, COM/2020/98 final 

30 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero 
Pollution for Air, Water and Soil', COM/2021/400 final 

31 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions EU Soil Strategy for 2030 Reaping the benefits of healthy soils for 
people, food, nature and climate, COM/2021/699 final 

32 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework 

for Community action in the field of water policy, (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1).  

33  CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

29 

 
                                                           
The funding authorities serving also as respective National Contact Points are consulted 
on a regular basis. As these institutions are in close contact with the project participants 
and other stakeholders in their country, they can bring in the perspectives and needs from 
different  national  backgrounds.  Decision-making  in  the  Board  of  Trustees  follows  a 
democratic approach (‘one country – one vote’) so that all PS are involved in the setting 
of priorities for the PRIMA Partnership. 

PRIMA  has  identified  the  strategic  research  and  innovation  priorities  through  a 
participatory  approach  and  consultations  with  a  broad  range  of  stakeholders,  including 
academia, funding organisations, businesses, and civil society. 

PRIMA-IS  has  launched  several  public  consultations,  allowing  institutions  and 
individuals to provide their inputs for identifying priorities and preparing PRIMA AWPs 
and related calls for proposals. These consultations were open for a month on the PRIMA 
website. 

Based  on  the  outcomes  of  the  public  consultations,  the  PRIMA  Scientific  Advisory 
Board propose priorities and topics to be included in the relevant AWPs. 

PRIMA makes information on all processes and documents available through appropriate 
communication and web dissemination. 

PRIMA also provides, through its website, information on the projects and their results 
and  is  working  to  connect  its  website  to  the  PRIMA  monitoring  platform,  providing 
information  on  budget,  coordination,  countries  involved  and  relevant  outputs  of  the 
projects (publications and list of demonstration sites). At this stage, all PRIMA running 
projects' webpages have been hosted on the PRIMA website for wider dissemination and 
promotion of the funded projects. 

Regarding  the  openness  towards  new  participants  and  mechanism  to  involve  new 
members  and  a  broader  set  of  stakeholders,  the  underlying  Article  185  initiative 
procedures  allow  countries  to  join  PRIMA,  and  defines  the  conditions  for  the  PRIMA 
membership. PRIMA is open to expanding the partnership and involving new members. 
PRIMA  has  an  open  membership  policy  and  is  actively  reaching  out  to  new  potential 
partners  across  the  Union  and  beyond.  Even  if  the  Partnership  has  been  established 
relatively recently, it has already received expression of interest from several countries34, 
and  is  planning  to  gradually  engage  a  broader  set  of  stakeholders  across  and  outside 
Europe. 

4.2.  How did the EU intervention make a difference? 

EU Added Value 

Today, the added value resulting from the PRIMA partnership compared to what could 
have  been  achieved  by  individual  PS  acting  independently  at  international,  national 
and/or regional levels can be considered high to date and even higher for the future.  

PRIMA plays a unique role in the Mediterranean R&I ecosystem and serves objectives 
not  covered  by  other  similar  initiatives,  as  detailed  under  Coherence  chapter.  The 

34 Libya, Palestine, Montenegro and Bulgaria.  

30 

 
                                                           
interviewed stakeholders indicated that PRIMA had a significant impact and sizable EU 
added value. If existing at all, alternatives to PRIMA funding take the form of national or 
European  research  funds.  Because  not  all  SM  PS  are  associated  to  the  latter,  one  may 
assume that actors from respective states would not have been able to execute their ideas 
at  the  same  scale  without  PRIMA.  Initiatives  by  individual  countries  would  hence  not 
have addressed the needs of the Mediterranean area as comprehensively as PRIMA. 

Moreover,  many  PRIMA  funded  projects  contain  a  clear  component  addressing 
Mediterranean needs and climate as well as economic conditions, which could hardly be 
investigated  otherwise.  The  interviewees  stressed  that  the  partnership  significantly 
contributed  to  building  up  additional  cooperation  and  networks  to  address  the  specific 
needs of the Mediterranean. Moreover, they also pointed out that, whereas they differ in 
the socio-economic structure of their farming sectors, EU PS may nonetheless profit from 
the knowledge created in PRIMA projects gained from the SM PS as they share similar 
ecological features. 

Apart  from  creating  and  transferring  relevant  knowledge  at  scale,  PRIMA  provides  an 
added value to the EU through its application of the principle of equal footing. That is, by 
ensuring  equal  treatment  and  voice  for  all  SM  PS,  the  partnership  has  managed  to 
develop  into  a  potent  tool  of  science  diplomacy  for  the  EU.  Moreover,  any  progress 
towards higher political stability and sustainable development of the SM PS has positive 
political  effects  on  the  EU  as  well,  as  it  helps  to  address  climate  change  and  lowers 
migration pressure. Furthermore, this added value may likewise last into the future as the 
interviewees  highlighted  that  PRIMA  had  set  the  foundations  for  future  collaborations 
between  EU  and  SM  PS.  This  relates  not  only  to  structures  and  procedures,  but  to  a 
significant  reputation,  networks  and  knowledge  capabilities  for  addressing 
the 
environmental, economic and societal needs in the Mediterranean Area that PRIMA has 
built up. In addition, many of the involved ministries and agencies, which are active in 
other  research  fields,  have  aligned  procedures,  at  least  to  some  extent,  and  built  trust 
among  each other.  Hence, there is  additional potential added value  – next  to  the actual 
one  –  for  the  future  also  beyond  PRIMA  or  by  extending  the  current  scope  within 
PRIMA. 

To analyse to which extent additional financial resources are mobilised, PRIMA-IS uses 
the leverage effect as an indicator. While also used by other partnerships, in the context 
of PRIMA, the factor measures the ability of PRIMA to attract additional financing from 
PS  and  to  multiply  H2020  budget  resources  (Section  1),  including  through  additional 
activities  (Section  2  and  Section  3).  According  to  the  Basic  Act,  “The  Union  financial 
contribution,  including  EFTA  appropriations,  shall  equal  the  PS'  contributions  to 
PRIMA”. So, by 2028 a minimum of EUR 1 of in-kind and/or financial contributions by 
PRIMA  and  its  funding  bodies  shall  be  leveraged  for  each  euro  of  EU  funding.  The 
formula  contains  the  actual  financial  and  in-kind  contributions  divided  by  the  EC 
contribution (Figure 6).35 

35 The leverage effect is the ratio between the costs incurred by PS and the total amount of EU funding paid to PRIMA 
beneficiaries  at  the  cut-off  date  of  the  data  reported  in  the  Annual  Activity  Reports.  PS  contributions  take  into 
account  not  only  the  direct  financial  contributions  to  beneficiaries  from  PS  (Section  2  calls),  but  also  the  costs 
incurred by all funding bodies in the implementation of indirect actions (in-kind contributions of Section 2 calls), 
and the costs of other activities (in-kind contributions for Section 3 activities) (CSES 2022). 

31 

 
                                                           
Figure 2  Formula for the calculation of the Leverage effect  

Source: PRIMA (2021) 

The  Leverage  ratio  has  remained  broadly  stable  during  the  initial  few  years  of 
programme  implementation  (Table  13)  and  in  all  years  above  the  target  of  1,  meaning 
that PS contribution  at least  equals  EU contribution.  The decrease in  2020 results from 
the delay of payments to Section 2 beneficiaries in the wake of the Covid-19 situation. In 
return,  a  significant  increase  in  payments  can  be  expected  once  the  sanitary  and 
economic situation is stabilised.   

To  interpret  the  leverage  effect,  it  has  to  be  remarked  that  only  spent  funds  are 
considered,  while  EU  R&I  partnerships  often  calculate  those  or  similar  indicators  by 
allocated  funds.  Since  these  tend  to  be  higher  than  the  volumes  that  are  ultimately 
disbursed for various reasons, PRIMA effectively applies a stricter measure of leverage. 
On  the  other  hand,  for  the  evaluated  period  PSIAs  amount  to  around  half  of  the  PS 
contributions in 2018-2021. Nevertheless, the values can be regarded as promising, and it 
is very likely that the aimed goal that national funds are equal to the EU contribution will 
be exceeded. 

Table 13   Components of the leverage effect calculation over the first years of the initiative (calculated on disbursed 

amounts in EUR) 

PS disbursed, Section 2 

PS disbursed, Section 3 

EU disbursed 

Leverage factor 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

total 2018-
2020 

Source: PRIMA (2022) 

20 233 270 

6 419 151 

17 201 751 

11 524 034 

8 160 779 

n/a 

20 469 927 

13 876 980 

33 885 474 

18 938 112 

21 347 935 

1 615 288 

39 918 083 

40 766 058 

57 487 798 

1.55 

1.72 

1.07 

n/a 

1.43 

4.3. 

Is the intervention still relevant? 

Relevance 

The  future  of  the  Mediterranean  Basin’s  key  natural  resources  (water,  soil,  coastlines, 
and  biodiversity)  continues  to  be  threatened  by  a  number  of  pressures  acting 
simultaneously  and  in  many  cases  chronically,  including  urbanisation,  industrialisation, 
the  expansion  of  intensive  agriculture  activities  and  aquaculture  and  the  unsustainable 
exploitation of natural resources. The fragility of the region is further aggravated by its 
sensitivity  to  climate  change.  According  to  the  6th  Assessment  Report  of  the  Working 
Group  II  of  the  Intergovernmental  Panel  on  Climate  Change,  the  Mediterranean 
ecosystems are expected to be among the most impacted ones by the consequences of the 
progressing climate change. 

32 

 
 
 
The  Southern  Mediterranean  region  is  further  facing  governance,  socio-economic, 
climate, environmental and security challenges, many of which result from global trends 
and  call  for  joint  action  by  the  EU  and  Southern  neighbourhood  partners.  Protracted 
conflicts  continue  to  inflict  terrible  human  suffering,  trigger  significant  forced 
displacement,  weigh  heavily  on  the  economic  and  social  prospects  of  entire  societies, 
especially  for  countries  hosting  large  refugee  populations,  and  intensify  geopolitical 
competition and outside interference.  

These  challenges,  as  well  as  the  effects  of  the  Covid-19  pandemic,  are  putting  natural 
resources and agriculture under enormous pressure. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has 
further  destabilised  already  fragile  agriculture  markets,  demonstrating  the  risks  and 
serious  consequences  for  food-importing  countries  in  the  South  of  the  Mediterranean 
region. Together with rising food and energy prices, this is likely to increase poverty and 
instability in these vulnerable regions.  

Therefore,  the  transformation  to  unpolluted  natural  resources  and  healthy,  equitable, 
resilient and sustainable food systems needs to be a continued priority for Mediterranean 
societies. 

President  Ursula  von  der  Leyen’s  “Geopolitical  Commission”  recognises 
the 
Mediterranean’s  particular  role  and  stresses  that  it  intends  to  collaborate  closely  with 
Mediterranean partners  on the EU Green  Deal so “we  can make the region a leader in 
climate solutions.” The EU, through a wide range of projects and programmes, supports 
its  Southern  neighbourhood  partners  in  developing  and  implementing  green  policies.  It 
promotes cooperation to fight pollution and climate change, offering to help its Southern 
neighbourhood  partners  implement  the  Paris  Climate  Agreement  and  its  subsequent 
developments and works to share best practice and expertise. 

Over the last few years, PRIMA has succeeded in establishing a trust-based and effective 
collaboration  between  Northern  and  Southern  Mediterranean  countries  to  develop 
common and innovative, sustainable, cost-effective and efficient solutions for sustainable 
food  systems  and  integrated  water  management.  As  the  main  EU  initiative  in  the 
Mediterranean to deliver on these key R&I challenges, PRIMA is bridging the R&I and 
socio-economic divide in the Southern and Eastern neighbourhood and enhancing health, 
peace and stability for the region’s societies in the long term. 

Now more than ever is the time for more collaboration to identify innovative solutions to 
safeguard  water  resources,  increase  food  and  nutrition  security  and  strengthen  the 
resilience, equity and sustainability of food and farming systems. 

The reviewed information indicates that the specific objectives of PRIMA have been and 
remain relevant for the PS and the Mediterranean R&I ecosystem. Through its thematic 
and specific objectives and implementation, the partnership addresses key challenges of 
the Mediterranean region. 

Stakeholder needs in the Mediterranean Area 

The  Mediterranean  area  features  distinct  conditions  regarding  its  water  and  agro-food 
systems, which are heterogeneous across the PS. To start with, agriculture constitutes a 
major  economic  sector  regarding  its  share  in  the  GDP  for  several  PS.  In  particular, 
agriculture is economically important to various SM PS (Figure 2).  

33 

 
Figure 2  Development of the contribution of agriculture, forestry, and fishing to the GDP in % 

Source 1: Visualisation based on World Bank (accessed in 2022)36 

Similarly, agriculture is also a major source of employment in some PS (Figure 3). 

Figure 3  Development of the share of the population employed in agriculture, forestry, and fishing (in %) 

Source: Calculation based on World Bank (accessed in 2022)37 

36  36  Evaluation  study  on  the  European  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation  for  addressing  Global 
Challenges and Industrial Competitiveness - Focus on activities related to the green transition –RTD/2021/SC/023 
-  Interim  Evaluation  of  the  Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area  (PRIMA) 
(forthcoming) 

34 

 
 
 
                                                           
Closely  related  to  the  agro-food  system,  water  constitutes  another  key  challenge  for 
almost all PS. Certain areas in the Mediterranean Area are subject to severe water stress38 
(Figure 4). Notably, this applies to PS such as Lebanon, Türkiye, Greece, and Spain.  

Figure 4  Water stress levels in the Mediterranean region 

Source: adapted from World Resource Institute (accessed in 2022) 

Even under optimistic assumptions, researchers expect water scarcity levels in most PS to 
increase in the future (Figure 5). 

Figure 5  Water stress level developments in the Mediterranean region  

Source:  adapted from World Resource Institute (accessed in 2022) 

38 The ratio between the consumptive and non-consumptive withdrawal of water and the available  renewable surface 

and groundwater supplies (World Resource Institute, no date provided).  

35 

 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                            
 
Persistent  water  scarcity  can  be  linked  to  negative  ecological  (e.g.,  the  loss  of  soil 
moisture), social (e.g., the lack of access to quality drinking water), and economic (e.g., 
the decrease in agricultural incomes) consequences. The European Environment Agency 
(2021)  estimates  that  about  20%  of  the  European  territory  and  30%  of  the  European 
population  are  affected  yearly  by  water  stress.  Moreover,  the  World  Bank  (2017) 
indicates  that  the  economies  of  SM  PS  are  particularly  vulnerable  to  increased  water 
stress, with 71% of the GDP of the Middle East and North Africa region being exposed 
to it, compared to 22% worldwide. Similarly, some of the SM PS suffer from rather low 
food  security  levels:  While  the  annual  Global  Food  Security  Index  from  autumn  2021 
ranked PS from the EU in the upper percentiles (France 9th, Germany 11th,  Italy 18th, 
Portugal  21st,  Spain  24th,  and  Greece  27th),  PS  from  outside  the  EU  tend  to  rank 
considerably lower, with Türkiye holding the highest place among them (48th) and Egypt 
the lowest (62nd) (Economist 2022)39. Moreover, the current situation with the Russia's 
invasion  of  Ukraine  threatens  food  security  in  many  countries.  There  is  a  common 
reliance  among  the  Mediterranean  countries  on  the  agricultural  sector  and,  in  turn,  on 
water  sources.  In  particular,  this  is  the  case  for  SM  PS.  Present  or  future  issues  in  the 
fields  of  agro-food  and  water  management  may  therefore  considerably  contribute  to 
social  instability  in  these  states.  However,  instability  in  the  Southern  Mediterranean 
region  may  ultimately  translate  into  problems  for  societies  within  the  EU  as  well  by 
driving migration.  

Since the challenges associated with water and agro-food systems tend to be complex and 
multidimensional, coordinated and joint efforts seem reasonable to address them.  There 
has  been,  and  continues  to  be,  an  array  of  political  and  R&I  initiatives  to  address  the 
various  ailments  of  the  Mediterranean  region40.  This  indicates  the  enduring  need  for 
tailored  multilateral  interventions.  PRIMA  is  advantageously  positioned  to  facilitate 
these political  and R&I initiatives as it can directly feed relevant  insights  from its R&I 
projects into the policy arena. 

Addressing the needs of PRIMA stakeholders and flexibility of operation 

Almost  all  stakeholders  regard  the  PRIMA  SRIA  as  highly  relevant  for  addressing  the 
problems faced by the PS regarding climate change41. The interviewees indicated that the 
thematic areas lined out in the SRIA address the needs of the stakeholders and PS very 
well  and  that  its  main  themes  of  food  security,  sustainable  farming  systems,  and 
sustainable water management have become even more important since the inception of 
PRIMA.  In  addition,  the  SRIA  identifies  challenges  and  objectives  on  a  rather  broad 
level. This allows PRIMA to be operationally flexible (see, for example, the introduction 
of  Nexus  topics  in  the  AWP202142).  Many  stakeholders  value  this  agility  because  it 
enables  the  partnership  to  cater  to  current  thematic  developments  and  challenges  in  its 
annual AWPs. Most interviewees also regarded the specification of the objectives in the 

39 The index does not cover all PS, missing Croatia, Cyprus, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia. Being ranked 

12th, Israel constitutes an exception among the non-EU PS. 

40  Corresponding  examples  are  the  European  Neighbourhood  Instrument  Cross-Border  Cooperation  Mediterranean 
(ENI  CBC  MED)  program  2014-2020  or  the  European  Cooperation  Programme  for  the  Mediterranean  area 
(INTERREG-MED), the UfM, or individual ERA-NETs. 

41 A few interviewees nonetheless indicate the need to update the SRIA, which was devised in 2018. 
42 See https://prima-med.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/AWP21.pdf and  

https://prima-med.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/AWP22.pdf  

36 

 
                                                           
calls as  adequate. The high  relevance that the R&I stakeholders attribute to  the calls is 
reflected in the large number of proposals submitted each year, especially in the thematic 
area of farming. Moreover, this is also echoed by  the considerable amounts that the PS 
have committed to PRIMA.  

Beyond  creating  thematic  knowledge  to  tackle  some  of  the  most  pressing  issues  of  the 
Mediterranean  region,  PRIMA  can  also  be  considered  relevant  in  strengthening  the 
cooperation  between  the  SM  PS.  This  is  important  since  SM  PS  are  not  as  actively 
involved  in  multilateral  cooperation  as  the  EU  PS  for  example.  Also,  the  interviewees 
indicated  that  many  participants  from  SM  PS  consider  participation  in  PRIMA 
particularly prestigious. 

5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? 

5.1.  Conclusions 

The evaluation  faced certain limitations,  as none of the projects  funded by PRIMA has 
been finished  yet.  Therefore, the focus of the evaluation  lies less on long-term impacts 
and  more  on  the  structure,  implementation  processes,  and  the  current  progress  of  the 
Programme.  In  particular,  it  is  evaluated  whether  there  has  been  significant  progress 
regarding the specific objectives, as these are not fully dependent on the exploitation of 
the achieved results in the projects. In this context, it can be concluded that PRIMA has 
been successful.   

The partnership addresses environmental, socio-economic and policy challenges that are 
crucial  to  the  future  development  of  a  more  circular  and  sustainable  Mediterranean 
region. PRIMA contributes to key EU political priorities, objectives and initiatives such 
as  the  European  Green  Deal,  in  particular  Farm  to  Fork  and  Biodiversity  strategies, 
Bioeconomy  Strategy,  Climate  Adaptation  Strategy  and  the  Circular  Economy  Action 
Plan,  as  well  as  the  SDGs.  At  the  same  time,  the  partnership  greatly  contributes  to 
strengthening  the  relations  and  the  collaboration  between  the  EU  and  its  Southern 
neighbours. In some cases, it has even encouraged cooperation among the latter.  

PRIMA-IS  successfully  established  PRIMA  as  a  platform  to  strengthen  R&I  and 
collaboration and is coherently embedded into the political landscape. While there have 
been  significant  implementation  challenges  and  some  shortcomings  in  the  beginning, 
there have been continuous efforts to improve administration. 

Regarding  the  funding  structure,  Sections  1,  and  2  can  be  assessed  overall  as  smartly 
designed and as a successful approach to achieve the multiple objectives of PRIMA. Yet, 
there is little formal evidence of the use and effectiveness of Section 3, as not all PS tend 
to  report  their  PSIAs.  A  reasonable  explanation  seems  to  be  that  corresponding  PS 
perceive the administrative process of reporting a PSIA as complex and laborious. Also, 
Section  2  faces  some  practical  challenges  like  additional  administrative  procedures 
applied by some PS, or difficulties to fund national beneficiaries if many selected.  

The  structure  largely  fosters  R&I  capacities  based  on  a  strong  competitive  selection 
process. At the same time, the design of the partnership allows researchers from the SM 
PS to benefit considerably. For example, it strengthens their capabilities to apply for and 

37 

 
 
to  manage  transnational  projects,  as  shown  by  their  considerable  participation,  and 
funding  received  in  Section  1  (both  above  the  targets  fixed),  scientific  co-publications, 
South-South  cooperation.  Similarly,  there  are  indications  that  participants  from  EU  PS 
likewise  profit  by  being  enabled  to  conduct  scientific  high-level  transnational  research 
and align their R&I activities to the needs of the Mediterranean Area. Moreover, PRIMA 
structures (e.g., the multi-party Board of Trustees), principles (e.g., the principle of equal 
footing) and activities (e.g., work of PRIMA-IS) have contributed to the establishment of 
trustful  relationships  between  the  EU  and  the  SM  PS.  As  PRIMA  contributes  to  the 
improvement  of  the  relations  between  the  EU  and  its  Southern  neighbours,  the 
partnership can be seen as a useful and successful mean of European science diplomacy 
and paves the way for a potential extension of PRIMA.  

While  it  is  too  early  to  assess  the  ultimate  contributions  of  the  funded  projects  to  the 
partnership’s  various  objectives,  especially  due  to  the  Covid-19  pandemic  and  initial 
administrative  differences  between  the  PS,  the  reviewed  information  suggests  that  they 
are nevertheless on track. 

5.2.  Lessons learned 

The  assessment  also  reveals  some  potential  for  improvement  and  corresponding 
recommendations concerning the programme. 

Harmonising  national  administrative  procedures  regarding  Section  2:  While 
different  stakeholders  have  invested  significant  efforts  into  improving  the  efficiency  of 
administrative  procedures,  the  process  remains  laborious  for  the  potential  beneficiaries, 
and  difficulties  arise  (e.g.,  project  partners  could  start  their  work  at  the  same  time, 
differences in funding eligibility, cuts of funding contributions). Hence, additional efforts 
by PS and PRIMA-IS are needed to further align  procedures and to strengthen reliability 
and speed, such as common catalogues of eligible costs, more homogenous amounts of 
funding  or  harmonisation  of  reporting  schedules.  In  addition,  mechanisms  to  support 
those PS that face the greatest challenges in committing and disbursing funds would be 
helpful. While legally difficult, some support from other countries or the EU in section 2 
may help overcome some challenges with this section.  

De-risk the preparation of proposals for applicants: The rather low success  rates of 
project  proposals  in  Section  1  mean  a  risky  investment  for  consortia  partners  and  may 
lower  the  attractiveness  of  PRIMA  in  the  long  term.  As  an  increase  in  funding  is 
unlikely,  other  possibilities  need  to  be  considered  (e.g.,  more  tailored  calls,  further 
refinement of the call procedure in a two-stage call process).  

Optimising PSIAs: PSIAs receive a different degree of awareness and importance from 
the PS, and in the longer term, the suitability of Section 3 for the strategic goals should 
be  re-assessed  by  PRIMA  and  NFAs.  In  the  short  term,  it  may  prove  helpful  to  invest 
additional efforts into sensitising PS about the importance of PSIAs. Moreover, to unlock 
the full contribution potential of Section 3 towards an integrated research area, PRIMA 
may benefit from facilitating the reporting requirements of PSIAs as much as possible so 
that they cater better to the limited resources of NFAs. Another option for increasing the 
strategic  relevance  of  the  Section  3  would  be  a  greater  emphasis  on  exchange, 
networking and training (see also next recommendations). 

38 

 
Support  community  building  and  project  exchange:  To  fully  exploit  synergies 
between  the  projects  and  to  foster  the  building  of  longer-lasting  communities,  efforts 
should  be  intensified  to  boost  the  exchange  between  individual  projects.  Related 
activities  should  go  beyond  exchange  between  coordinators  but  address  all  relevant 
partners. Options could be, e.g., i) to organise webinars or events for projects that have 
either newly been funded or are in their early stages, to facilitate learning from those that 
are  further  advanced43;  ii)  dedicated  events  for  exchange  between  projects  with  similar 
challenges or thematic focus; iii) to support further activities across projects (e.g., support 
a  common  application  for  cross-projects  Horizon  Booster).  Moreover,  networking  and 
brokerage  events  to  enlarge  the  community  and  deepen  interaction  between  the  actors 
remain of high importance. 

Capacity building: Since the inception of PRIMA, there have been different activities to 
support  stakeholders  from  different  countries  which  has  led  to  some  progress  in  their 
research  and  innovation  systems.  However,  there  is  still  untapped  potential  to  enable 
even  more  active  participation  in  PRIMA.  This  relates  to  the  overall  number  of 
beneficiaries  from  SM  PS,  which  could  be  higher,  and  to  their  roles  in  the  projects. 
Therefore,  additional capacity-building activities and support to  better connect  with  the 
transnational community are needed to enable corresponding countries to intensify their 
participation.  For  example,  this  comprises  additional  training  seminars  for  proposal 
writing, in-depth training on project coordination, etc. 

Adjust  KPIs:  There  have  already  been  significant  efforts  and  progress  toward  the 
continuous improvement of the KPI system. Nonetheless,  current  KPIs still leave room 
for  improvement  regarding  their  usefulness  in  judging  the  achievement  of  the  specific 
objectives and the impact of projects. This concerns, e.g., the lack of KPIs to effectively 
measure  R&I  strategy  alignment  beyond  the  procedural  level.  Moreover,  it  has  to  be 
ensured  that  the  impact  of  projects  will  be  monitored  adequately,  beyond  the  mid-term 
review or the end review of a project, i.e., some kind of regular monitoring or follow-up 
after the end of a project. 

Ramping up communication and dissemination: PRIMA-IS is aware that a key focus 
of  future  outreach  activities  should  especially  communicate  project  impacts  as  soon  as 
these  are  available.  This  type  of  communication  will  be  very  relevant  to  sustain  high 
political  commitment  in  the  long  term.  Moreover,  there  is  a  need  for  better  internal 
communication within the project consortia.  

Boosting  Southern-Southern  cooperation:  While  some  progress  has  been  made,  a 
further  increase  in  cooperation  among  the  SM  PS  would  be  beneficial.  Stronger 
cooperation  could  contribute  to  an  improvement  in  the  relationships  between  these 
countries. Hence, there should be increased efforts to bring corresponding communities 
together, e.g., by specific events to broker consortia participation among SM PS. Another 
option  would  be  to  adapt  project  evaluation  criteria  to  favour  proposals  (maybe  for 

43  CSES  (Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services)  (2022):  Study  to  assess  the  performance  and  impact  of  the 

PRIMA programme. Commissioned by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment 

39 

 
                                                           
certain  calls)  where  several  participants  from  SM  PS  are  actively  interacting  with  each 
other44.  

44 Not only in the same consortia but working together in concrete tasks and Work packages. 

40 

 
 
                                                           
ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

Lead DG 

The European Commission’s Directorate-General (DG) for Research and Innovation is the lead DG for this interim evaluation (PLAN/2022/1106). 

Organisation and timing 

The  Commission  published  a  call  for  evidence  on  the  interim  evaluation  of  the  ‘Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area” 
(PRIMA)’ on 22 July 2022 that was open for feedback until 2 September 2022. 

Three  partnerships  based  on  Article  185  TFEU  (the  Active  and  Assisted  Living  Research  and  Development  Programme  (AAL2),  Eurostars-2  and  the 
Partnership  for  Research  and  Innovation  in  the  Mediterranean  Area  (PRIMA))  had  evaluations  coming  up  by  the  end  of  2022.  In  this  context,  DG 
Research and Innovation set up one inter-service steering group (ISSG) to oversee the three evaluations.  

The  ISSG  was  established  on  4  July  2022  involving  representatives  from  the  Secretariat-General,  DG  for  Research  and  Innovation,  DG  for 
Communications  Networks,  Content  and  Technology,  DG  for  Agriculture  and  Rural  Development,  DG  for  Informatics,  DG  for  Budget,  DG  for 
Competition,  DG  for  Education,  Youth,  Sport  and  Culture,  DG  for  Environment,  DG  for  Migration  and  Home  Affairs,  DG  for  Maritime  Affairs  and 
Fisheries, DG for Structural Reform Support, the Joint Research Centre and the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. The ISSG 
contributed to the evaluation and ensured that it met the necessary standards. Two meetings were held. 

Evidence, sources and quality 

This evaluation report drew on the following sources of evidence: 

  DECISION  (EU)  2017/  1324  OF  THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT  AND  OF  THE  COUNCIL  -  of  4  July  2017  -  on  the  participation  of  the 

Union in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) jointly undertaken by several Member States. 

  EC (2015): PRIMA Programme Inception Impact Assessment.  

41 

 
 
  EC (2016): IMPACT ASSESSMENT - Accompanying the document Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on 
the participation of the Union in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) jointly undertaken by several 
Member States {COM(2016) 662 final} 

  EC (2017): Evaluation of the Participation of the EU in research and development programmes undertaken by several Member States  based on 

Article 185 of the TFEU, Commission Staff Working Document, SWD(2017)340 Final 

  PRIMA (2022): Input to the PRIMA Interim Evaluation. Report by PRIMA-IS. 

  CSES (Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services) (2022): Study to assess the performance and impact of the PRIMA programme. Commissioned 

by PRIMA-IS for self-assessment. 

  PRIMA: Networking analysis - Funded Projects 2018-2021 

  PRIMA Annual Activity Reports (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021) 

  REGULATION  (EU)  No  1291/2013  OF  THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT  AND  OF  THE  COUNCIL  of  11  December  2013  establishing 

Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC. 

  European Environment Agency (2021): Water resources across Europe. Confronting water stress: an updated assessment.  

  Fägersten, Björn (2022): Leveraging Science Diplomacy in an Era of Geo-Economic Rivalry. Towards a European strategy.  

  Economist  (2022):  The  Global  Food  Security  Index.  https://impact.economist.com/sustainability/project/food-security-index/.  Accessed 

31.03.2022. 

  World Bank (2017): Beyond Scarcity. Water Security in the Middle East and North Africa. Hg. v. World Bank.  

  World Bank (no date provided a): Development  Indicators Data  Bank.  Indicator:  Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (% of  GDP). 

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Accessed 01.04.2022. 

  World Bank (no date provided b): Development Indicators Data Bank. Indicator: Employment in agriculture, female (% of female employment) 

(modelled ILO estimate). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Accessed 01.04.2022 

42 

 
 
  World  Bank  (no  date  provided  c):  Development  Indicators  Data  Bank.  Indicator:    Employment  in  agriculture,  male  (%  of  male  employment) 

(modelled ILO estimate). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Accessed 01.04.2022. 

  World  Resource 

Institute 

(date  provided):  Aqueduct  Water  Risk  Atlas.  https://www.wri.org/applications/aqueduct/water-risk-
atlas/#/?advanced=false&basemap=hydro&geoStore=0103742d088cc8b722ac444ed9163f79&indicator=bws_cat&lat=31.541089879585837&lng
=28.037109375000004&mapMode=view&month=1&opacity=0.5&ponderation=DEF&predefined=false&projection=absolute&scenario=optimis
tic&scope=baseline&threshold=25&timeScale=annual&year=baseline&zoom=4. Accessed 01.04.2022. 

The information has been quality assured. 

External expertise 

Expert advice has been widely used to prepare this Commission Staff Working Document. It mainly includes the Study report on the interim evaluation 
of PRIMA, commissioned by the EC. The contractor is a consortium including Technopolis, Austrian Institute for Technology, Kerlen, Fraunhofer, 
Science Metrix and ZSI Center for Social Innovation45.  

45  Evaluation  study  on  the  European  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation  for  addressing  Global  Challenges  and  Industrial  Competitiveness  -  Focus  on  activities  related  to  the  green 

transition –RTD/2021/SC/023 - Interim Evaluation of the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) (forthcoming) 

43 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED 

Study design 

Ιndependent experts from a consortium including Technopolis, Austrian Institute for Technology, Kerlen, Fraunhofer, Science Metrix and ZSI Center for 
Social Innovation, carried out a support study to provide input for this evaluation. 

Limitations and reliability of data 

The  study  report  on  the  interim  evaluation  of  PRIMA  was  largely  conducted  by  using  desk  research  and  the  analyses  of  administrative  data  and 
stakeholder interviews. 

It  covers  the  period  from  the  implementation  of  PRIMA  in  2017  until  today  and  mainly  focuses  on  the  partnership’s  2018-2021  AWPs.  The  overall 
purpose of the study is to review the current status and the achievements of PRIMA and to provide impulses to support PRIMA’s implementation and 
inform possible mid-term adjustments. 

The main input came from PRIMA-IS, which is the Dedicated Implementation Structure of PRIMA. Its evaluation input report (Prima 2022) provided a 
detailed account of statistics, indicators and explanations of key developments like changes in the implementation. In addition, PRIMA-IS made available 
an assessment study, which the foundation had commissioned concerning this evaluation (CSES 2022). Moreover, there has been extensive exchange on 
both reports and additional information that PRIMA has delivered. 

Furthermore, all existing documents of PRIMA, e.g. Ex-Ante Assessment, Basic Act, Statutes, Website, PRIMA Intelligent Analytical Tool (available on 
the website), as well as relevant publications for evaluations for public-public partnerships, have been reviewed. Overall, as far as possible quantitative 
assessments (e.g. also via publication analysis) have been performed and complemented by qualitative insights. 

Ultimately,  15  interviews  with  diverse  and  key  stakeholders  of  different  types  and  geographical  origins  have  been  conducted  covering  an  adequate 
sample of interested parties. 

44 

 
 
However, the evaluation faces certain limitations, as none of the projects funded by PRIMA has been finished yet. Therefore, the focus of the evaluation 
lies  less  on  long-term  impacts  and  more  on  the  structure,  implementation  processes,  and  the  current  progress  of  the  Programme.  In  particular,  it  is 
evaluated  whether  there  has  been  significant  progress  regarding  the  specific  objectives,  as  these  are  not  fully  dependent  on  the  exploitation  of  the 
achieved results in the projects. 

Moreover, in contrast to other Article 185 initiatives in H2020, PRIMA has no legal predecessor. While there have been partnerships between different 
national agencies in earlier ERA-Nets, and initiatives towards the Mediterranean area existed, the incorporation of PRIMA as a public-public partnership 
on the EU level  was  completely new. Hence, key  activities and expected outputs of the partnership  included the set-up of efficient  and trust-building 
structures and procedures in the first years of its establishment to pave the way for successful working. While this task required considerable effort, it was 
further complicated by the Covid-19 pandemic. In line with that, as no PRIMA project has  been finished yet, it is not easy to  assess the partnership’s 
quantitative impact. 

Nevertheless,  tentative  aspects  of  outcomes  and  impacts  are  addressed  to  the  extent  possible.  As  mandated  by  the  Terms  of  reference  for  the  “Green 
Transition” evaluation, the evaluation focuses on the assessment criteria effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, and added value to the European 
Union (EU). 

Methodology, sources of information and data analysis 

The methodology for the study report consists of various approaches and sources based on: 

•  Desk-based research; 

• 

Interviews; 

•  Evaluation input report and assessment study; 

•  Analysis of funding and administrative data; 

•  Other quantitative methods. 

45 

 
 
The  work  carried  out  by  the  contractors  is  of  good  quality.  Its  content  has  been  discussed  with  Commission  services.  The  recommendations  of  the 
evaluation study will be taken up in discussions  between the Commission and PRIMA-IS and their implementation will be followed up as part of the 
Commission's oversight of the PRIMA programme. 

46 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX AND, WHERE RELEVANT, DETAILS ON ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS (BY CRITERION) 

Evaluation Matrix 

Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

Relevance 

To what extent have the objectives of 
the  partnership  been,  and  are  still 
relevant  vis-à-vis  of  the  needs  and 
problems addressed by the FP? How 
flexible has the partnership been? 

PRIMA  relevance 
the 
for 
Mediterranean 
Area 

The  challenges  associated  with  water  and  agro-food  systems  in  the  Mediterranean 
area are complex and multidimensional. Therefore, coordinated and joint initiatives 
are needed to address them. PRIMA is advantageously positioned to facilitate these 
political  and  R&I  initiatives  as  it  can  directly  feed  relevant  insights  from  its  R&I 
projects into the policy arena. 
PRIMA continues to be relevant for the Mediterranean area since the sustainability 
of  water,  food  and  agriculture  is  still  threatened  by  a  number  of  climate, 
environmental and socio-economic pressures, including the current energy and food 
geo-political crisis.  

Needs  of  PRIMA 
and 
stakeholders 
flexibility 
of 
operation 

Findings  from  the  Interim  Evaluation  study  and  insight  from  interviews  indicated 
that the thematic areas lined out in the SRIA address the needs of the stakeholders 
and  PS  very  well  and  that  its  main  themes  of  food  security,  sustainable  farming 
systems,  and  sustainable  water  management  have  become  even  more  important 
since the inception of PRIMA.  
PRIMA  can  be  considered  relevant  in  strengthening  the  cooperation  between  the 
SM  PS. This is  important  since SM PS are less used to  multinational cooperation. 
Also,  the  interviewees  indicated  that  many  participants  from  SM  PS  consider 
participation in PRIMA particularly prestigious. 

47 

 
 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

Coherence 

Internal coherence 

How  well  do  the  different  actions 
work  together,  internally  (i.e.  to  the 
partnership,  with  other  partnerships 
and  with  other  FP  activities),  and 
with  other  EU  interventions/policies 
(complementarities, 
synergies, 
overlaps)?  Is  PRIMA  more  effective 
in  achieving  synergies,  compared  to 
other modalities of the programme? 

External 
coherence 

The gathered data suggest that PRIMA has managed to strike a balance in terms of 
the  instruments  applied  and  the  topics  addressed.  For  example,  agro-food  projects 
may  have  a  water  management  component,  as  water  management  projects 
sometimes consider farming systems. Hence there are no hard boundaries between 
the thematic areas. 
Moreover, the addition of Nexus projects that target the WEFE Nexus in 2019 can 
be  seen  as  a  further  step  to  harmonise  the  PRIMA  project  portfolio  aside  from 
techno-scientific silos. 

PRIMA-IS has taken steps to coordinate with entities of the Horizon Europe FP of 
similar  thematic  focus,  such  as  the  EU  Mission  “A  Soil  Deal  for  Europe”  or 
candidate partnerships like the European Partnership Water Security for the Planet 
(Water4All).  PRIMA-IS  has  been  in  contact  with  relevant  initiatives  that  could 
facilitate the translation of PRIMA results into practice, such as the EIT Food and 
the KIC Climate. PRIMA also complements the Water JPI, the Interreg Euro-MED 
2021-2027 Programme, or the ENI CBC MED Programme 2014-2020.  
Overall, PRIMA has thus managed to establish internal and external coherence well. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

Management of 
the 3 sections of 
implementation  

Efficiency 

What is the relationship between the 
resources used by the partnership and 
the  changes  it  is  generating?  How 
did  processes  cater  for  flexibility 
needs in  implementation? How cost-
effective  has  PRIMA  been?  How 
the  costs  of 
proportionate  were 
application  and  participation  borne 
by  different  stakeholder  groups, 
taking  into  account  the  associated 
benefits? 

PRIMA  secretariat  has  managed  to  set  up  an  effective  Dedicated  Implementation 
Structure  (PRIMA-IS).  The  work  of  PRIMA-IS  is  largely  judged  as  helpful, 
efficient,  and  responsive according to  the evaluation  study.  The flexibility  that the 
SRIA  grants,  allowing  stakeholders  to  take  up  current  thematic  developments  and 
challenges in each AWP is acknowledged. 
In particular, the interviewed beneficiaries indicated that the management of Section 
1  was  straightforward  and  good  to  handle  since  the  processes  adhere  to  the 
application and selection rules of H2020.  
Conversely, the reviewed information suggests that efficiency potential remains for 
Section  2.  This  mainly  results  from  divergences  between  PRIMA  and  national 
procedures.  In  response  to  the  difficulties  with  Section  2,  PRIMA-IS  has  been 
actively  working  to  streamline  procedures  (e.g.  by  employing  different  activities, 
such  as  Mutual  Learning  Exercise  workshops  where  management,  funding  and 
procedural issues are presented, and solutions are proposed and sought with NFAs). 
Concerning  the  different  sections,  there  were  indications  that  the  efficiency  of 
Section  3  could  be  higher  as  well.  Notably,  the  procedures  for  reporting  PSIAs  to 
PRIMA-IS might exceed the resources of some NFAs.  
While PRIMA is running to a high degree efficiently, improving KPIs is a point for 
PRIMA-IS to focus on further. 

49 

 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

Effectiveness 

What  is  the  progress  made  towards 
the  objectives  of  the  partnership  and 
those  of  H2020, 
the 
contribution  to  EU  priorities  and 
Sustainable Development Goals? 

including 

Contribution 
to 
EU  priorities  and 
Sustainable 
Development 
Goals 

With  its  thematic  focus,  PRIMA  contributes  to  the  wider  EU  policies  such  as  the 
European Green Deal, the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change, the 
Farm  to  Fork  Strategy  (the  role  in  the  area  of  R&I  and  sustainable  food),  the 
Circular Economy Action Plan, the Zero pollution Action Plan, and the EU Water 
Framework Directive (WFD). PRIMA is expected to contribute to the Sustainable  
Development Goals, in particular SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 6 (Clean Water and 
Sanitation),  SDG  10 
(Responsible 
Consumption and Production). 

Inequalities),  and  SDG  12 

(Reduced 

Were  adequate  systems  put  in  place 
to  produce  and  share  lessons  learnt 
from 
results 
implementation  and 
achieved,  for  policy  making  and 
between  FP  interventions?  To  what 
extent 
programme 
communication/valorisation  strategy 
allow  identifying,  capitalising  upon 
and 
transferring  good 
(possibly) 
practices/results? 

does 

the 

Includes also the partnership-specific 
question  of  how  the  partnership  has 
international 
helped 
positioning  and  visibility  of 
the 
European  R&I  system,  and  an 

foster 

the 

Financial 
commitments 
PRIMA 

to 

The stakeholders acknowledged the efforts made by PRIMA-IS to secure a political 
and  financial  commitment  from  the  PSs  who  participate  in  the  programme  today. 
Funding for Sections 2 and 3 that are dependent on national funding should continue 
to be ensured. 

Communication 
and  dissemination 
activities 

There  have  been  strong  efforts  by  PRIMA-IS  and  PRIMA  projects  toward 
communication  and  dissemination.  PRIMA  has  a  positive  reputation  and  is  well 
known in the Mediterranean Area, particularly in the SM PS. To further sustain the 
high  political  commitment  to  PRIMA,  communication  and  dissemination  needs  to 
be ramped up. 

Alignment 
national 
programmes 

of 
R&I 

The  SRIA  constitutes  the  key  strategic  document  that  supports  the  activities  of 
PRIMA  and  seems  well-aligned  with  national  and  international  R&I  priorities. 
Many stakeholders value the flexibility that the SRIA grants, allowing them to take 
up current thematic developments and challenges in each AWP. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

of 

assessment 
international 
partnership and project level 

cooperation 

the 

level 

Critical mass 

of 
at 

PRIMA has helped to raise critical research mass and promote scientific integration 
across  countries  that,  in  the  absence  of  PRIMA,  would  be  unlikely  to  have 
cooperated  as  closely  in  the  absence  of  a  clear  funding  incentive  and  strategic 
framework to facilitate cooperation. 
PRIMA has funded so far 168 projects with 1571 beneficiaries at an overall volume 
of EUR 224 million. With this, non-EU actors participated in 42.5% of all projects 
and accounted for 38% of all beneficiaries.  

of 
Strengthening 
the  research  and 
innovation funding 
capacities  and  the 
implementation 
capabilities 

PRIMA  has  implemented  various  projects  aiming  to  develop  innovative  solutions 
through IAs and RIAs. In addition to research organisations, a significant number of 
projects also involve industrial partners, who would have the capacity to transfer the 
outcomes of PRIMA projects into marketed products or services. 
PRIMA allows especially the SM PS to leverage their R&I capacities. By engaging 
in PRIMA, researchers from the non-PS gain access to the funding opportunities of 
Section  1,  which  the  EU  finances.  Although  funding  under  Section  2  is  limited  to 
national  proportions,  the  section  nonetheless  allows  researchers  to  participate  in 
larger consortia than under national funding. 

EU added value 

What is the value resulting from the 
partnership that is additional to the 
value that could result from 
interventions carried out at regional 
or national level or with other forms 

value  of 

Added 
PRIMA 
partnership  with 
to 
regards 
PS 
individual 
activities 

PRIMA  plays  a  unique  role  in  the  Mediterranean  R&I  ecosystem  and  serves 
objectives  not  covered  by  other  initiatives.  Many  funded  projects  contain  a  clear 
component  to  Mediterranean  needs  and  climate  as  well  as  economic  conditions, 
which  could  hardly  be  investigated  otherwise.  PRIMA  significantly  contributed  to 
building up additional cooperation and networks to address the specific needs of the 
Mediterranean.  Apart  from  creating  and  transferring  relevant  knowledge  at  scale, 
PRIMA provides an added value to the EU through its application of the principle of 
equal  footing.  That  is,  by  ensuring  equal  treatment  and  voice  for  all  PS,  the 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Criteria 

Evidence-based answers 

of implementation? 

partnership has managed to develop into a potent tool of science diplomacy for the 
EU. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX IV. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS [AND, WHERE RELEVANT, TABLE ON SIMPLIFICATION AND BURDEN REDUCTION] 

The data presented in  table underneath  is  based on  the results of the first  PRIMA interim evaluation conducted in  2022, covering first  four  calls 
launched in 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 for the implementation of the initiative. Since none of the projects was finished at the time of the evaluation, 
and only 58 (out of 168) reached the mid-term, only preliminary information is available.  

With  data  on  long-term  and  even  short-term  impacts  of  the  Programme,  still  emergent  (see  above),  an  assessment  of  the  relationship  between 
resources used and the changes, which the Partnership is generating, is preliminary.  

Table 1. Overview of costs and benefits identified in the evaluation46 

Citizens/Consumers  

Businesses 

Administrations 

Quantitative  

Comment 

Quantitative  

Comment 

Quantitative 

Comment  

Costs on research programme level 

Administrative 
Indirect-management dedicated 
implementation structure cost 
(EC-level)  

recurrent 

Section 2: Participating countries invested 
in-kind through NFAs working on the 
Programme; these efforts are quantified and 
accepted up to 6% in a similar way as for 
Section 1 and included in the national 
contributions. 

Section 1 
(H2020):up to 
6% of total 
annual 
Programme 
budget, currently  
~4.6% in 
commitments , 
3.8 % in 
disbursed 

46  Where  there  is  a  prior  impact  assessment, the  table  should  contain  as  a  minimum  the  costs/benefits  identified  in  the  IA  with  the  information  gathered on  the  actual  cost/benefit.  As  available,  the table  should  include  the  monetisation  (EUREUREUR) of  the  costs/benefits  based  on  any  quantitative 

translation of the data (time taken, person days, number of records/equipment/staff etc. affected or involved represented in  monetary value  – see Standard cost model, for example). For all information presented, it should be included in the comments section whether it relates to all Member States or is 

drawn from a subset. An indication of the robustness of the data should be provided in Annex II on Methodology and analytical models used. 

53 

 
 
                                                           
                        
 
 
 
 
 
recurrent 

recurrent 

recurrent 

Support Actions 
Portfolio of services and 
activities to monitor the 
programme, and to strengthen 
the skills and knowledge of 
project beneficiaries and the 
wider community 

Research projects 
168 Grants funding 
transnational research and 
innovation projects (53 under 
H2020 Section 1 + 115 under 
Section 2) 

Direct benefits 

Contributing to SDG 2: 
achieve food security and 
improved nutrition, and 
promote sustainable 
agriculture 

spending 

Section 1 in 
commitments 
<3% of total 
annual 
Programme 
budget, 2% in 
disbursed 
spending 

Section 1: in 
commitments 
93.6% of total 
annual 
Programme 
budget 

Participating countries also develop targeted 
capacity building actions under Section 3; 
these efforts are quantified and accepted, 
and included in the national contribution, 
but represent very limited amounts 

Participating Countries contributions to 
Section 2+Section 3 should at least match 
the EU contribution 

Alignment of national programmes 

54 

BENEFITS 

Solutions  for 
food security, 
nutrition, rural 
transformation 
and sustainable 
agriculture 

Developing 
resilience of 
small holders to 
climate related 
extreme events, 
increasing 
productivity and  
incomes 
Developing 
resilient 
agricultural 
practices for 
better 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
productivity 
while helping 
maintain 
ecosystems, 
strengthening 
capacity for 
adaptation to 
climate change, 
Maintaining 
genetic diversity 
of seeds, 
cultivated plants 
& farmed 
animals 

Development of 
business 
opportunities in 
the water sector 

recurrent 

Contributing to SDG 6 - clean 
water and sanitation ( 
improving water quality by 
reducing pollution,. increasing 
water-use efficiency, 
implementing integrated 
water resources management, 
protecting and restoring 
water-related ecosystems 

Improved 
water 
availability and 
quality 
Participation of 
local 
communities in 
improving water 
and sanitation 
management 
Increased 
awareness 

SDG 9. Facilitate sustainable 
and resilient infrastructure 
development in developing 
countries through enhanced 
financial, technological and 
technical support to 

recurrent  Non-EU 
entities 
receiving~ 
32% of the EU 
financial 
contribution. 

18.9% of 
beneficiaries are 
private for profit 
organisations 

Increased 
awareness of 
innovative 
solutions 

Alignment of national programmes 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mediterranean countries 

SDG 13 climate action  

recurrent 

Capacity building and 
transnational networking, 
knowledge exchange and best 
practices 

recurrent 

Indirect benefits 

Better quality of life 

recurrent 

(well above 
indicative 
target of 25%) 

8 
Platform/Hubs 
across the 
53/168 
projects passed 
midterm. 

104 
publications 
(under 53 
projects /168 
that passed 
mid-term) 

Indirect 
evidence of 
positive impact 
on better food 
and water 
quality 

Strengthen 
resilience and 
adaptive capacity 
to climate  

Organisation of 
capacity building 
events for 
Mediterranean 
participants. 

Section 2: 
Organisation of 
matching 
workshops for 
NFAs 

Integrate climate change measures into 
national policies, strategies, and planning 

Section 2: Coordination of NFAs efforts 

Support sustainability of food 
and water systems 

recurrent 

Solutions for 
sustainable food 
and water 
production under 
development 

123 DEMO sites 
(under 53 
projects /168 that 
passed mid-term) 

Indirect evidence 
of positive 
impact on the 
relevant sectors 

56