Horizon Europe and the digital & industrial transition : interim evaluation support study : executive summary.
Date: 2024-09-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Subjects: EU programme, Framework Programme for Research and Development, competitiveness, digital transformation, information technology, innovation, modernisation of industry, new technology, report, research and development, sustainable development

Interim Evaluation support study 

Read the full publication 
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition - Interim Evaluation 
support study 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This  report  provides  the  results  of  the  interim  evaluation  of  Horizon  Europe  (HE)  focusing  on  the 
programme’s contribution to the Digital and Industrial Transition (DIT). The evaluation was carried out from 
February  2023  to  January  2024  by  a  consortium  consisting  of  Technopolis  Group,  AIT,  Fraunhofer  ISI, 
OPIX, Science Metrix and VVA. 

Scope 

The  evaluation  considered  all  activities  that  contribute  to  the  Digital  and  Industrial  Transition  under 
Horizon Europe’s first Work Programme 2021-2022, with a primary focus on Cluster 4, ‘Digital, Industry 
and  Space’  under  HE  Pillar  II,  ‘Global  Challenges  and  European  Industrial  Competitiveness’.  The 
evaluation also includes stand-alone reports on 11 institutionalised and co-programmed Partnerships1. 
The  findings  are  based  upon  a  triangulated  mix  of  qualitative  and  quantitative  methods,  including 
stakeholder consultations through interviews, workshops, and a large-scale survey; case studies; portfolio, 
composition and contribution analysis; bibliometrics, intellectual property rights (IPR) data, text mining, etc. 

Context and state of play 

Research  and  Innovation  (R&I)  are  essential  enablers  of  systemic  change  towards  a  fair,  net-zero, 
digital  and  resilient  society,  contributing  to  a  sustainable  and  globally  competitive  European  industry. 
Against the backdrop of the recent crises and in an unstable global context, the EU recognises the central 
role of R&I in its policy agenda, especially to achieve the Digital and Industrial Transition’s objectives, and 
to strengthen the EU’s strategic autonomy in critical technologies and value chains. To that end, the  ‘New 
Industrial  Strategy  for Europe’2,  the  European  Green  Deal,  the  Path  to  the  Digital  Decade,  the  EU Space 

1 The institutionalised Partnerships’ reports within this evaluation cover both H2020 (ex-post) and HE (interim) evaluations, and 
include  ECSEL  and Key  Digital  Technologies Joint  Undertakings  (JU),  the  Smart  Networks  and  Services  JU,  the EuroHPC 
JU,  the  European  Partnership  on  Metrology  and  its  predecessor  EMPIR  (Art-185  Partnership),  as  well  as  EIT  Digital,  EIT 
Manufacturing,  and  EIT  RawMaterials.  The  co-programmed  Partnership  reports  only  focus  on  HE,  and  cover  AI  Data  and 
Robotics (ADRA), Made in Europe, Processes4Planet, and Photonics. The Clean Steel CP is not in the scope of this study. 

2 EC (2020) A New Industrial Strategy for Europe, COM/2020/102 final 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Executive Summary  
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition 

Strategy  and  the  EU’s  Economic  Security  Strategy  provide  an  array  of  multi-faceted  objectives.  This  sets 
the context for Horizon Europe, the ninth EU Framework Programme for R&I.   

An  analysis  of  the  content  of  Horizon  Europe  grants  signed  under  the  first  Work  Programme  (WP,  2021-
2022  calls)  suggests  that  33.5%  of  the  projects  contribute  to  the  Digital  and  Industrial  Transition  (2 906 
projects).  These  projects  account  for  44%  of  the  total  EU  funding  committed  (EUR  10.5bn).  The  main 
contribution is made through HE Pillar II, which accounts for 71% of the EU funding dedicated to the DIT. 
Various activities under Pillar I and Pillar III also contribute to the DIT, which respectively accounts for 17% 
and 13% of the total HE funding committed to achieving the DIT. Within Pillar II, Cluster 4 is at the core of 
the HE contribution to the DIT. A total of 622 projects have been funded under this cluster, accounting for 
9 223 participations, and a total EU funding contribution of EUR 3 809.7m3.  

Relevance 

The objectives set for Cluster 4 in the Horizon Europe Strategic Plan 2021-20244, and their translation into 
the  Work  Programme  2021-2022,  were  highly  relevant  to  overcome  Europe’s  multi-dimensional 
challenges,  towards  a  more  sustainable,  smart  and  competitive  industry,  and  a  resilient  society.  To 
address those, the programme has been designed with an impact orientation. Within its first WP, Cluster 4 
focuses on strengthening the capacity for innovation and technological development by supporting key and 
strategic  technologies  critical  for  industry,  promoting  cross-fertilisation.  The  increased  scope  and 
consolidation  of  topics  in  specific  areas  enables  the  integration  of  multiple  technologies,  through  a 
“technology-neutral” approach. A broad stakeholder consultation confirmed the alignment of Cluster 4 with 
stakeholders’  needs.  In  the  global  geopolitical  context,  Cluster  4  is  also  an  important  enabler  for 
strengthening Europe’s strategic autonomy, for instance, in the fields of space, raw materials, and quantum. 
Eight of the 10 technology areas identified as sensitive and posing immediate risks for the EU are covered 
under Cluster 45.   

Cluster 4 supports both mature technology development activities to foster market and societal uptake 
through Innovation Actions (30% of EU funding through  Innovation Actions, IAs, at Technology Readiness 
Level  (TRL)  5-7),  and  riskier  research  activities  focused  on  enhancing  capacity  and  long-term 
competence  building in  deep  tech  innovation  (61% EU funding  through  Research  and  Innovation  Actions, 
RIAs  at  TRL3-5).  In  addition,  Cluster  4  maintained  a  balance  between  building  upon  previously  funded 
research  and  providing  flexibility  to  respond  to  emerging  needs.  The  programme  has  evolved  from 
being  primarily  responsive  to  the  research  community’s  needs  to  become  a  tool  for  supporting  political 
priorities.  Instruments  such  as  Framework  Partnership  Agreements6  foster  continuity  and  agility  in  fast-
evolving  areas.  Some  limited  funding  gaps  were  identified,  mostly  in  fast-evolving  or  critical  technology 
areas like AI, robotics, quantum or advanced computing. Research and Higher  Education Institutes (HEIs) 
perceive  a  lack  of  resources  for  pre-competitive  collaborative  research,  while  the  industry  perceives  the 
balance as sufficient.  

The objectives and scope of the European Partnerships under Cluster 4 are particularly relevant to HE’s 
high-level objectives and to contribute to the DIT. They are set up to address Europe’s complex challenges 
and long-term future needs, targeting the development of emerging and enabling technologies to strengthen 
the competitiveness of a digitally enabled industry. They connect the relevant actors along strategic value 
chains,  enabling  collective  coordination  and  alignment  through  their  common  Strategic  Research  and 
Innovation  Agendas  (SRIAs).  They  also  specifically  aim  to  foster  the  European  position  in  global  value 
chains and the resilience and sustainability of European society.  

Efficiency 

Horizon  Europe  has  streamlined  its  administrative  processes  compared  to  Horizon  2020  (H2020)  and 
introduced  several  simplification  measures  while  maintaining  an  important  level  of  continuity  with 
Horizon 20207. For instance, project application and selection processes are perceived to be simpler than 

3 The data analysed through eCorda extract (reference date 19/06/2023) covers the projects funded under the  HE WP 2021-
2022, including mainstream Cluster 4 projects and four co-programme Partnerships (ADRA, MiE, P4P, Photonics), as well as 
three  institutionalised  Partnerships  (KDT,  SNS,  EuroHPC).  Data  on  EPM  and  the  three  EIT  KICs  under  the  scope  of  this 
evaluation were not available through eCorda.  

4 Horizon Europe Strategic Plan 2021-2024, https://ec.europa.eu/ document/ IP_21_1122_EN.pdf  
5 EC (2023), Commission Recommendations on critical technology areas for the EU’s economic security for further risk 

assessment with Member States, https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/critical-technology-areas-eus-economic-
security-further_en 

6 Seven FPAs are funded under Cluster 4 
7  The  expanded  use  of  lump-sums  could  not  be  evaluated  as  no  lump-sum  calls  were  funded  under  Cluster  4  –  European 

Commission (2021). Assessment of the Lump Sum Pilot 2018-2020. 

2 

 
 
 
Executive Summary  
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition 

under  H2020.  Proposal  writing  requires,  on  average,  35  person-days,  mostly  borne  by  coordinators.  The 
transparency of the funding decision process and the level of detail provided in the evaluation reports, both 
important  issues  under  H2020,  are  reported  as  improved.  Survey  respondents  show  a  high  level  of 
satisfaction with the overall  timeliness of the funding decisions. The average time-to-grant during WP21-
22  was  242  days,  which is aligned  with  the  245-day  target  but  higher than  under  H2020  LEIT  (216  days, 
SME instrument excluded).  

The overall success rate for HE Cluster 4 reached 19% during the WP21-22, well above the 15% success 
rate of the H2020 LEIT programme. The significant share of high-quality proposals not being funded, also 
linked to the openness of the calls, suggests a good capacity of the community to address the call topics. 
However,  this  could  also  disincentivise  participation  from  some  stakeholders.  The  low  success  rate  in 
Artificial  Intelligence  (AI),  Data  and  Robotics  topics  (13%),  and  to  a  lesser  extent  in  Next  Generation 
Internet,  Advanced  Materials  and  Manufacturing  and  processing  technologies  topics  tends  to  indicate 
insufficient funding levels.  

With regard to funding distribution, project size has been rising considerably since FP7. Cluster 4 projects 
have  an  average  EU  contribution  of  EUR 5.8m  per  project  (EUR 428 000  per  participant),  compared  to 
EUR 4.7m under H2020 (EUR 370 000 per participant). Increased project size and average contribution per 
partner  enable  critical  mass  to  be  built  with  a  more  systemic  approach  to  multi-faceted  challenges,  but  it 
also exacerbates transaction costs for project coordination. The distribution of funding between action types 
under HE Cluster 4 is similar to the one of LEIT at the start of H2020 (two-thirds of EU funding dedicated to 
RIAs  and  one-third  to  IAs),  addressing  concerns  over  the  diminishing  FP  funding  for  lower  TRLs  (3-5) 
raised in the H2020 evaluations. The evolution of the share of stakeholders involved is stable and balanced 
between  the  four main  types  of stakeholders  (research organisations,  higher education,  large enterprises, 
and  SMEs).  The  funding  distributed  through  European  Partnerships  compared  to  “mainstream”  calls  has 
decreased from 66% in H2020 LEIT to 44% in HE Cluster 4.  

Despite  constant  improvement  in  monitoring  practices,  the  data  made  available  for  this  evaluation  had 
several  gaps  or  inconsistencies,  which  limited  the  assessment  of  some  aspects  of  the  FP  effectiveness, 
efficiency,  and  coherence.  Suggestions  to  further  improve  the  monitoring  and  evaluation  framework  of 
the FP include for instance a strengthened coordination of the data collection on indirectly managed actions 
(including  the  Financial  Support  to  Third  Parties  scheme,  certain  types  of  indirectly  managed  European 
Partnerships, etc.), or the replacement of topic-level flags in eCorda by more accurate project-level flags. 

With regards to project implementation and cost-effectiveness, the costs for administrative management 
and  reporting  represent  a  significant  part  of  projects’  budget  (6%  to  10%  in  general,  up  to  20%  in  some 
cases).  HE  incorporates  several  mechanisms  to  remain  responsive  and  adaptive  to  arising  needs,  and 
coordinators  were  positive  about  the  EC’s  flexibility  for  changes  in  projects’  consortia.  Stakeholders 
welcomed  an  improved  reliance  on  beneficiaries’  cost  accounting  practices  as  an  important  simplification 
measure.  The  delegation  of  the  programme  management  to  Executive  Agencies  (EAs)  has  been 
expanded, and while enabling cost reduction for project administration, it also reportedly creates challenges 
by  modifying  the  direct  “feedback  to  policy”  loop  between  projects  and  policy  DGs8.  The  introduction  of 
Gender Equality Plans and ethics self-assessment as new eligibility criteria have overall been well received, 
while some of the new Open Science requirements related to open access to publications and FAIR data 
–  findability,  accessibility,  interoperability,  and  reusability  –  principles  create  some  implementation 
challenges.   

In addition, leveraging additional in-cash and in-kind  contributions from public and private partners is 
an  important  requirement  for  European  Partnerships.  However,  the  inconsistency  and  gaps  in  the  data 
available  limit  the  formulation  of  evidence-based  conclusions  and  highlight  the  need  to  improve  and 
streamline  the  monitoring  system.  Based  on  data  provided  by  the  Partnerships  through  the  2023  Biennial 
Monitoring  Report  (BMR)  survey,  Cluster  4  co-programmed  Partnerships  show  a  direct  leverage  ratio  of 
around 0.6-0.7 (ADRA and Processes4Planet). For institutionalised Partnerships, KDT, EuroHPC, and EPM 
leverage contributions from both public and private sources, reaching a return of EUR 2.6 for KDT, EUR 1.3 
for EuroHPC, and EUR 1.1 for EPM for each EUR 1.0 of EU funding invested. 

8  European  Commission,  DG  RTD,  Daimer,  S.,  Seus,  S.,  Weber,  M.  et  al.,  Evaluation  study  on  the  relevance  and  internal 
coherence of Horizon 2020 and its policy mix, 2023 

3 

 
 
 
 
Executive Summary  
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition 

Effectiveness 

Expected output, results and long-term effects 

At  this  early  stage  of  the  programme,  the  assessment  of  the  effectiveness  of  HE  is  limited:  Cluster  4 
projects  have  end  dates  mostly  in  2025  and  2026,  and a  minimal  timelapse  of  two years  from  the  project 
end  is  needed  for  any  tangible  effects  to  materialise.  This  evaluation  focused  on  expected  output  and 
results. Regarding the expected output of the programme, from a scientific perspective, Cluster 4 projects 
are  likely  to  result  in  publications,  roadmaps,  and  new  or  improved  methodologies  or  protocols.  From  a 
technological  perspective,  expected  project  output  includes  tests,  demonstrations,  pilots,  or  prototypes. 
From  a  societal  perspective,  projects  are  expected  to  contribute  to  Sustainable  Development  Goals: 
based  on  ex-ante  topic  trackers,  EUR  2.4bn  in  Cluster  4  funding  (69%)  contributes  to  climate 
mainstreaming, while EUR 2.1bn (66%) contributes to the digital agenda. Projects addressing the DIT are 
mostly contributing to SDG 7 ‘Affordable Clean Energy’ (53%) and SDG 13 ‘Climate Action’ (39%)9. Horizon 
Europe projects also provide research-based recommendations to policymakers. 

On the expected results of the programme, Cluster 4 is expected to increase Europe’s capacity to carry 
out R&I, with a focus on product and process innovation, strengthening industry’s uptake of R&I results. To 
that  end,  Cluster  4  is  expected  to  build  structural  collaborations  between  industry  and  research 
stakeholders,  reduce  value-chain 
their  sustainability  and  resilience. 
fragmentation  and  reinforce 
Nonetheless, industry’s limited absorption capacity remains an important barrier to EU competitiveness. To 
facilitate  uptake,  Cluster  4  seeks  to  strengthen  the  societal  acceptance  of  technology  through  the 
programme’s increased inclusiveness with a prominence of human-centred and ethical approaches as well 
as  greater  users’  and  citizens’  engagement.  HE  also  fosters  gender  equality  in  R&I,  through  the 
implementation  of  Gender  Equality  Plans  and  gender  mainstreaming  and  integration  in  R&I  content,  with 
54% of Cluster 4 research topics including a gender dimension, while 46% still mention that “the integration 
of the gender dimension is not a mandatory requirement”. 

On  the  long-term  aggregated  effect,  the  FP  has  effectively  identified  and  laid  the  foundations  for 
sustained  EU  leadership  in  high-growth  areas  contributing  to  the  DIT,  and  it  is  expected  to  have  a 
transformative mid-term impact on entire sectors (e.g., robotics, nano-photonics, quantum). Opportunities to 
enhance FP leadership in other high-growth areas where the FP is performing relatively less well have been 
identified (e.g., batteries, advanced materials). In the field of Artificial Intelligence, the FP has maintained a 
significant role (e.g., highly cited publications) while globally ranking 4th or 3rd between 2011-2020, when 
world leaders (UK, US) have experienced declines in their contribution to top-tier AI research.  

Enabling factors and barriers 

Optimising  the  conditions  for  knowledge  creation  and  exploitation  is  key  for the  FP  to  deliver results. 
Cluster  4  provides  the  conditions  to  strengthen  Europe’s  innovation  capacity  and  uptake  by  supporting 
technologies  considered  critical  for  industry,  combining  mature  and  incremental  technology  development 
activities  (IAs  at  TRL  5-7)  with  riskier  research  activities  (RIAs  at  TRL3-5).  The  lack  of  support  for 
collaborative  research  at  lower  TRL  (2-3)  and  the  difficulty  in  ensuring  continuity  between  RIAs  and  IAs 
(around  TRL  4-5)  are  reported  as  barriers  to  leveraging  the  programme’s  potential.  In  addition,  though 
limited the support for pan-EU access to technology infrastructures for testing and demonstration is seen as 
essential to lower R&I investment risks and foster uptake (e.g., Open Innovation Testbeds). 

Research-industry  collaboration  at  the  EU  level  is  at  the  core  of  Cluster  4,  which  funds  large  multi-
partner consortia involving all types of stakeholders. Large and small companies are involved in RIAs and 
IAs  alike,  fostering  industry’s  technology  absorption  capacity  through  earlier  involvement  in  the  R&I 
process.  To  that  same  end,  both  co-programmed  and  institutionalised  Partnerships  have  an  important 
enabling role in the policy mix, fostering long-term and trust-based collaboration between public and private 
entities,  and  the  integration  of  entire  value  chains.  Through  the  co-creation  of  their  SRIAs,  they  enable 
better  demand  articulation  and  integration  of  R&I  and  sectoral  industrial  policies  at  the  EU  and  national 
levels. The capacity of Partnerships to extend R&I ecosystems and exploit cross-sectoral opportunities can 
be strengthened. 

The adoption of an impact-oriented systemic approach, promoting the cross-fertilisation of technologies 
across  application  domains,  is  also  essential  to  reach  HE’s  objectives.  The  six  HE  Cluster  4  destinations 

9 DIT projects also contributed to SDG 11 ‘Sustainable Cities and Communities’ (28%), SDG 12 ‘Responsible Consumption and 
Production’ (24%), and SDG 9 ‘Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure’ (22%) – based on a text mining analysis of projects’ 
abstracts. 

4 

 
 
 
Executive Summary  
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition 

have  a  strong  cross-sectoral  dimension,  each  involving  almost  all  the  top  10  industrial  sectors  (NACE-2 
level) of the Cluster 4 for-profit beneficiaries.  However, the collaboration intensity at project level between 
for-profit companies from different sectors is limited. Newcomers also enable the FP to broaden its scope 
and  outreach,  and  the  involvement  of  local  stakeholders  in  place-based  innovation  projects  fosters  the 
scalability  and  replicability  of  HE  results  through  cross-regional  collaboration.  The  Financial  Support  to 
Third Parties (FSTP) scheme, encouraged for 10% of Cluster 4 calls, eases access to the FP and enables 
outreach  to  a  wider  number  of  participants,  especially  SMEs  and  start-ups.  However,  the  lack  of  data  on 
FSTP prevents further analyses.  

Measures  to  strengthen  the  dissemination,  exploitation,  and  communication  of  HE  results  are  also 
important  in  maximising  impact.  The  sound  identification  of  the  most  promising  key  exploitable  project 
results, along with their maturity level, is a long-lasting challenge. Patent filing trends from EU-27 countries 
have  remained  stable  since FP7,  while  the  EU global  patent  shares  in  most  KETs  have  been  declining10. 
Besides, even though the patent profiles of Cluster 4 researchers show positive specialisation in all KETs, 
patent output is expected to be limited, and thus could be further incentivised. The efficient management of 
intellectual assets in joint R&I activities, during and after projects, remains challenging. The engagement of 
the  FP  with  standardisation  activities  is  low  as  well.  Partnerships  are  seen  as  important  enablers  to 
strengthen the EU’s contribution to standards and their role could be further leveraged, for instance through 
direct involvement in standardisation bodies. Skills development is also a priority, with a significant shift in 
intensity  under  HE  and  an  increased  focus  on  digital  and  green  skills,  as  well  as  building  a  resilient  and 
sustainable workforce. Skills inclusion should be especially fostered for high TRL projects with low Societal 
Readiness Levels.   

With regard to international cooperation, HE seeks to modulate its bilateral relations in line with European 
interests  and  values.  To  position  the  EU  among  the  global  leaders  in  strategic  sectors,  contribute  to 
international  standards  and  attract  talent,  collaboration  with  top  players  is  essential.  Under  Cluster  4, 
around  21%  of  research  topics  encouraged  international  cooperation,  yet  third  and  associated  country 
participation  has  been  stable  since  H2020  and  could  be  further  incentivised,  ensuring  reciprocity  and 
strengthening  ties  with  “like-minded”  countries.  In  addition,  to  secure  the  EU’s  strategic  autonomy  in 
strategic  value  chains,  the  HE  Regulation  Art.  22.5  enables  the  modulation  of  the  participation  of  entities 
from third countries and was used for 11 topics in Cluster 4 WP21-22. Stakeholders stressed that restricting 
access  to  the  FP  requires  a  robust  and  transparent  approach,  ensuring  consistency  throughout  the 
programme. On the selection of strategic topics, stakeholders pointed to the lack of data on risks facing the 
resilience of technology value chains and critical dependencies. 

Coherence 

On  the  internal  coherence  of  the  FP,  Cluster  4  created  important  interlinkages  across  technology  and 
impact  areas.  Despite  progress,  stakeholders  stress  the  critical  need  to  foster  cross-fertilisation  of 
technologies  beyond  current  levels  and  to  further  transcend  operational  silos.  The  consolidation  of 
Partnerships  enables  increased  integration  and  critical  mass11,  however  the  effective  development  of  the 
Partnership  landscape  into  a  cohesive  field  requires  behavioural  change  and  is  expected  to  take  time. 
Coordination  mechanisms  have  been  expanded,  and  the  strategic  programming  process  remains  the 
cornerstone to prioritise and establish strategic collaborations, for instance through joint calls and activities. 
Furthermore, the co-creation process for the drafting of the Work Programme can be conducive to greater 
synergies  and  inter-connections  between  Clusters.  This  is  the  case  for  Cluster  5  (Climate,  Energy  and 
Mobility)  which  shows  the  highest  connection  with  Cluster  4,  jointly  delivering  on  the  Twin  Transition; 
followed  by  Cluster  3  (Civil  Security  for  Society),  especially  for  Space  and  Advanced  computing. 
Connections  between  Cluster  4  and  Pillars  I  and  III,  including  with  ERC  and  EIC,  are  mainly  driven  by 
the 
cross-participation  of  organisations.  The 
operationalisation  of  synergies,  and  the  difficult  identification  of  key  results  are  among  the  enduring 
challenges hindering synergies. 

the  complexity  of 

fragmentation  of 

information, 

With  regard  to  external  coherence,  the  HE  Regulation  outlines  synergies  that  should  be  achieved  with 
over 20 other EU programmes, including the Digital Europe Programme (DEP), the Space Programme, the 
European  Defence  Fund  (EDF),  and  the  Connecting  Europe  Facility  (CEF)  whose  scopes  and  objectives 
specifically  align  with  the  activities  of  Cluster  4.  To  maximise  impact,  ensure  coherence  and  facilitate 
coordinated  actions  between  EU  programmes  and  policies,  a  “whole-of-government”  approach  has  been 

10  The  six  original  Key  Enabling  Technologies  (KETs)  include  advanced  manufacturing,  advanced  materials,  life-science 
technologies,  micro/nano-electronics  and  photonics,  artificial  intelligence,  security  and  connectivity,  https://research-and-
innovation.ec.europa.eu /key-enabling-technologies_en  

11 For example, the merger of the H2020 CP Robotics and AI into HE CP ‘AI, data and Robotics’ (ADRA), ongoing reflection to 

further integrate KDT (Chips JU) and the Photonics CP. 

5 

 
 
 
Executive Summary  
Horizon Europe and the Digital and Industrial Transition 

involving  various  Commission  Directorates.  Operationalising  synergies  across  different 
adopted, 
programmes  poses  different  challenges,  stemming  from  complex  long-term  planning,  different  strategic 
programming  processes  and  timelines,  and  variations  in  instruments  and  funding  rates.  The  coherence 
between  the  Digital  Europe  Programme  and  Cluster  4  is  significant12,  with  established  ties  between 
stakeholders’ communities, and the joint funding of the EuroHPC JU (including HE, DEP and CEF funding). 
The  Connecting  Europe  Facility  presents  built-in  synergies  mainly  with  the  SNS  and  KDT  JUs.  The 
Space programme also presents significant potential synergies with Cluster 4, especially as it is aimed at 
the  deployment  of  space  technologies.  The  European  Defence  Fund,  which  has  a  distinct  research 
window, presents a high potential for synergies, especially when looking at dual-use technologies. Potential 
for synergies  has  also  been  identified  with  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund  (ERDF)  as  well  as 
the European Social Fund (ESF+) for skills. In addition, specific efforts have been made to foster synergies 
with  a  national  level  in  targeted  areas.  However,  the  misaligned  planning  processes,  the  dispersed 
responsibilities  between  national  bodies,  and  the  difficulties  in  implementing  co-funding  related  to  state 
aid rules remain important challenges. 

EU added value  

The  evidence  collected  demonstrates  the  high  input  and  ‘scale  additionality’  of  Horizon  Europe. 
Cluster 4 particularly supports the access of knowledge, expertise and skills through large-scale multi-
sectoral  consortia  of  European  and  international  partners.  It  builds  critical  mass  at  the  EU  level  and 
helps  stakeholders  integrate  into  larger  value  chains  and  ecosystems  in  strategic  sectors.  Cluster  4 
also mutualises efforts while lowering the risk of R&I investments through the availability and scale of 
funding for a wide scope of research topics. A large majority of surveyed unsuccessful applicants from 
Cluster  4  could  not  implement  their  projects  in  any  other  way.  Horizon  Europe  also  provides  high 
output  and  ‘behavioural  additionality’,  for  instance  through  international  mobility  opportunities  for 
researchers, joint commercialisation of research results, access to new markets, and more flexibility to 
respond to technological developments with mutualised risks. Stakeholders’ views on HE’s capacity to 
achieve  economies  of  scale  in  research  (same  results  at  lower  costs)  are  less  decisive.  The 
behavioural  additionality  of  the  programme  is  mostly  perceived  as  better  providing  systemic 
solutions to complex challenges. 

12 This is especially the case in advanced computing, Next Generation Internet, and AI, data and robotics, less so for KDT. 

6 

 
 
 
 
The purpose of  the second phase  in  the ‘Evaluation  Study  on the 
European  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation 
for Addressing Global Challenges and Industrial Competitiveness – 
Focus on Activities for the Digital and Industrial Transition (DIT)’ is 
to  evaluate  the  contribution  of  the  Horizon  Europe  Framework 
Programme  to  the  Digital  and  Industrial  Transition,  supporting  the 
European  Commission’s  interim  evaluation  of  the  Framework 
Programme  Horizon  Europe.  The  evaluation  considered  all  the 
activities  under  Horizon  Europe  pillars  contributing  to  the  Digital 
and Industrial Transition, with at core Cluster 4 and its associated 
11 co-programmed and institutionalised Partnerships.  

Studies and reports