REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Final Evaluation of Eurostars-2
Date: 2024-10-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, EU research policy, Framework Programme for Research and Development, aid to undertakings, innovation, international cooperation, research and development, scientific cooperation, small and medium-sized enterprises

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 3.10.2024  COM(2024) 436 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Final Evaluation of Eurostars-2 {SWD(2024) 470 final}  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

Final Evaluation of Eurostars-2 

1.  INTRODUCTION 

The Eurostars-2 programme was a public-public partnership funded under the Horizon 2020 
Framework Programme for Research and Innovation  (R&I) covering the 2014-2020 period. 
Eurostars-2  aimed  at  supporting  small  and  medium-sized  enterprises  (“SMEs”)  performing 
research  and  development  (R&D)  activities  through  international  cooperation.  It  was  the 
second iteration of a programme that started in 2008. 

The rationale behind this programme is that SMEs need access to market, finance, skills and 
knowledge in order to thrive and compete globally. They often lack in-house capabilities and 
capacity  to  achieve  the  innovative  breakthroughs  that  are  needed  for  their  scale  up  and 
integration  into  global  value  chains.  Collaboration  between  enterprises  and  with  public 
research-performing  organisations  are  key  for  faster  knowledge  diffusion  and  exploitation. 
Whilst many national programmes and instruments exist to facilitate participation of SMEs in 
R&I projects, most do not explicitly support or focus on international R&I collaboration.  

Under the Eurostars-2 programme, 33 participating countries, four additional non-EU partner 
countries and the EU, focused on the development of synergies of their R&I programmes and 
on improved cooperation between national and regional R&I programmes for the benefit of 
R&D-performing SMEs. 

Eurostars-2 pursued three objectives:  

•  Promotion of research activities that comply with the following conditions:  

o 

the activities are carried out by a transnational collaboration of research- and 
development performing SMEs among themselves or including other actors of 
the innovation chain (e.g., universities, research organisations);  

o  results  of activities are expected to  be introduced into the market  within two 

years of the completion of an activity.  

• 

Increased accessibility, efficiency and efficacy of public funding for SMEs in Europe 
by  aligning,  harmonising  and  synchronising  the  national  funding  mechanisms  of 
participating states. 

•  Promotion  and  increased  participation  of  SMEs  without  previous  experience  in 

transnational research.  

The European Union (“EU”) participated in Eurostars-2 based on Decision No 553/2014/EU 
of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  May  2014  on  the  participation  of  the 
Union  in  a  Research  and  Development  Programme  jointly  undertaken  by  several  Member 
States  aimed  at  supporting  R&D  performing  SMEs1  (the  “Decision”).  According  to  Article 

1 Decision No 553/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the participation 
of the Union in a Research and Development Programme jointly undertaken by several Member States aimed at 
supporting research and development performing small and medium-sized enterprises Text with EEA relevance 
(europa.eu). 

1 

 
 
 
 
15 of the Decision, the European Commission had to conduct a final evaluation of Eurostars-
2 by 31st of December 2022. 

This report provides the final evaluation of the Eurostars-2 programme, covering the period 
between  the  inception  of  Eurostars-2  in  2014  until  March  2022.2  The  report  builds  on  the 
interim  evaluation  of  Eurostars-2  performed  in  20173,  a  call  for  evidence  launched  in 
September  2022,  and  available  monitoring  data.  The  performance  of  Eurostars-2  was  also 
covered as part of the external ex-post evaluation of Horizon 20204. 

2.  CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW OF EUROSTARS-2 

The  Eurostars-2  programme  built  on  the  experience  of  its  predecessor,  the  Eurostars-1 
programme implemented between 2008 and 2013. The programme was financed at that time 
under Article 169 of the EC Treaty through an agreed EU contribution to a joint programme 
between Member States and the EU. 

The  objective  of  Eurostars-1  was  to  support  transnational  market-oriented  research  and 
innovation projects initiated and driven by R&D-performing SMEs in order to improve their 
competitive  position.  R&D-performing  SMEs  were  and  are  recognised  as  important 
stakeholders  for  the  European  knowledge-based  economy  facing  global  competition. 
Findings from the final evaluation of the Eurostars-1 programme5 showed that the financial 
support  successfully  helped  Eurostars-1  beneficiaries  to  develop  new  or  improved  products 
and services with  which they could  improve their competitive position and that 88% of the 
analysed Eurostars-1 projects developed their planned innovations.   

Similar  to  Eurostars-1,  Eurostars-2  had  no  specific  scientific  or  technological  focus  but 
supported cross-border  R&I collaboration among SMEs, large  firms,  research organisations 
and universities with a strong focus on internationalisation. 

Following the previous practice under Eurostars-1, the Eureka Secretariat was designated as 
the implementation structure for Eurostars-2. The Eureka Secretariat has been created as the 
operational  office  of  Eureka,  an  intergovernmental  initiative  established  in  1985  with  the 
objective of promoting cooperation in industrial research.6 

The funding contribution of the EU to Eurostars-2 from the Horizon 2020 budget was set to 
be up to EUR 287 million. For each Eurostars-2 project the funding base was a fixed share 
between national contribution and EU contribution, in line with the Decision. 

According to  the  Decision,  the tasks  of the Eureka Secretariat  in  implementing Eurostars-2 
included:  

2  Although  there  are no  further  calls  under  the  programme,  projects  supported  by  the  programme  and  related 
top-up payments will continue until 2025. 
3 European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Shaton, M., Pando, E., Vicini, I. et 
al., Interim evaluation of the Eurostars-2 Joint Programme, Publications Office, 
2017, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/357102 
4  European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Research  and  Innovation, Eurostars-2  final  evaluation  – 
Evaluation  study  of  the  European  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation  for  an  innovative 
Europe, Publications Office of the European Union, 2023, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/333838 
5 COM(2015)479 - Final evaluation of the Eurostars Joint Programme (2008-2013) 
6 Home - Eureka (eurekanetwork.org) 

2 

 
 
• 

• 

the preparation of the annual  budget  of the calls  and their  central  organisation (e.g., 
eligibility check, evaluation and ranking of applications), 
the collection of information from National Funding Bodies (“NFBs”) for the transfer 
of the Union contribution,  

•  promotional activities, 
• 

the  reporting  to  the  Eurostars-2  High-Level  Group7  and  the  Commission  on  the 
Eurostars-2 programme.  

The interim evaluation of Eurostars-2 performed in 2017 informed the impact assessment of 
its successor initiative “European Partnership on Innovative SMEs” supported under Horizon 
Europe. It highlighted that the major benefits of the Eurostars rest in the niche features of the 
programme,  such  as  its  bottom-up  approach,  its  strong  trans-national  focus,  the  division  of 
work  between  the  central  structure  and  the  decentralised  structures  of  national  funding 
bodies. It also enables beneficiaries to introduce new products within two years of projects’ 
completion  and  allows  SMEs  to  obtain  funds  without  any  prior  experience  in  transnational 
R&I collaboration.  

On the other hand, the interim evaluation pointed out that, due to the decentralised structure, 
times  to  grant  have  shown  a  high  level  of  heterogeneity  and  the  lack  of  synchronisation  of 
procedures often hampered the smooth implementation of the programme. The low number 
of active participating States and the uneven concentration8 of beneficiaries in them limited 
the  impact  of  the  programme.  A  certain  level  of  uncertainty  had  manifested  in  terms  of 
getting  funding  for  selected  projects  when  the  contribution  of  participating  States  had  been 
exhausted by other projects. 

3.  FINAL EVALUATION FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS 

3.1 Evaluation methodology and limitations 

The  final  evaluation  of  Eurostars-2  builds  on  the  findings  of  the  external  study  which 
incorporates  two  case  studies,  using  data  collected  through  surveys  and  approximately  30 
interviews  with  programme  participants  and  a  wider  variety  of  stakeholders  (including 
beneficiaries,  national  funding  bodies,  the  Eureka  Secretariat  and  Commission  services), 
complemented with statistical information about the Eurostars-2 Programme provided by the 
Eureka Secretariat. The call for evidence published in September 2022 gathered replies from 
62  entities  from  nine  different  countries  and  largely  confirmed  the  conclusions  that  were 
drawn from the interviews conducted with stakeholders. 

The monitoring data collected includes data, among others, on the number of applications for 
each cut-off, the countries of origin of the applicants, the number of funded projects for each  
cut-off, the total projects budget for each cut-off, the consortium composition for the 2014-
2020  funding  period,  all  approved  Eurostars-2  projects,  the  committed  budget  for  each 
participating  state  and  partner  country  for  each  cut-off  and  the  committed  EU  contribution, 

7 The Eurostars-2 High Level Group is the body in charge of supervising the implementation of the Eurostars-2 
Joint Programme, and in particular for the approval of the operational procedures for running the Eurostars-2 
Joint Programme, the approval of the call planning and call budget, and the approval of the ranking list of 
Eurostars-2 projects to be funded. 
8 9 participating countries concentrate more than half of all participating R&D SMEs: Germany, The 
Netherlands, United Kingdom, France, Spain, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway. 

3 

 
 
 
the  time-to-contract  per  country  for  cut-offs  1-15,  as  well  as  the  Annual  Reports  of  the 
Eurostars-2 programme from 2014-2021. 

As  around  half  of  the  Eurostars-2  projects  were  still  running  at  the  time  of  the  evaluation, 
insights from final reports are mainly projected from cut-offs 1-5, that are completed.  

Due to  a lack of more detailed information  and data on final  project  results and impacts  of 
Eurostars-2  projects,  mainly  insights  from  interviews  and  desk  research  are  integrated  into 
this  final  evaluation  giving  only  limited  information  on  the  actual  results  and  impacts. 
Although the Eureka Secretariat has changed its monitoring system in response to the Interim 
Evaluation (2017), which noted the insufficient accuracy and lack of up-to-date information 
in  the  Eureka  Secretariat  database,  it  was  not  yet  possible  to  assess  at  the  time  of  the  final 
evaluation  (2022)  if  the  new  monitoring  has  improved  data  timeliness  and  availability,  in 
particular due to the ongoing changes in the IT system of the Eureka Secretariat. 

Nevertheless,  changes  in  IT  systems,  staff  replacement  and  clearer  guidance  in  the  project 
agreement  are  expected  to  lead  to  an  improved  situation  in  the  successor  programme  of 
Eurostars-2, which is subject to reporting obligations related to co-funded partnerships under 
Horizon Europe, with an increased focus on impact. 

A  Staff  Working  Document  accompanying  this  report9  provides  further  details  on  the 
evaluation. 

3.2 Final evaluation findings 

Based  on  the  limited  data  available,  key  findings  from  the  final  evaluation  of  Eurostars-2 
according to the Better Regulation evaluation criteria10 are the following: 

Efficiency of implementation 

Between 2014 and end 2021, 15 joint calls took place (at least twice per year), attracting 5891 
projects’ proposals. The number of funded projects amounted to 1546. The main beneficiaries 
of the Eurostars-2 programme were R&D-performing SMEs (66%)11, 30% of which had no 
prior  experience  in  international  collaboration  before  having  participated  in  the  Eurostars-2 
programme.  It  was  an  attractive  funding  programme  with  a  high  success  rate  (27%)  for 
SMEs, many of them applying for the first time for EU funding rather than from national or 
regional funding programmes. 

Eurostars-2 has been running efficiently and there were no delays in the implementation of 
the Annual Work Plans and calls. The uniqueness of the programme rests on the funding of 
transnational  collaborative  projects  led  by  R&D  performing  SMEs.  Compared  to  the 
Eurostars-1  programme,  national  funding  rules  have  been  further  harmonized  and 
administrative  processes  were  sped  up.  For  instance,  the  time-to-contract  decreased 
significantly during the implementation phase of the Eurostars-2 programme and reached an 
average  duration  of  6,6  months.  Nevertheless,  significant  differences  between  participating 
countries  still  exist.  Consortium  members  for  a  given  project  faced  different  rules  for 

9 SWD(2024)470 
10 https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation/better-
regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en  
11 With the rest of the funding going to other stakeholders, such as research and technology organisations.  

4 

 
 
application depending on their country of origin and the provision of grants was subject to the 
availability  of  national  funding.  Also,  even  if  the  centralised  evaluation  process  of 
applications  is  regarded  as  well  structured,  it  is  also  sometimes  criticised  for  being  non-
transparent  by  applicants.  Complicated  application  processes  may  require  the  services  of 
external firms helping with the application process and writing the actual project application 
according to interviewees. 

With regards to the budget committed in the 2014-2020 period, the Eurostars-2 programme 
had  a  total  committed  public  budget  of  EUR  1.14  billion  coming  from  the  Annual  Work 
Plans. While the EU committed EUR 287 million (33.3%) to the financing of the projects, the 
remaining  EUR  856  million  (66.6%)  has  been  committed  by  the  Eurostars-2  participating 
countries through national  funding resources. However, funds were not  fully utilised as the 
evaluation  results  could  not  match  the  available  national  funding  per  call.  Based  on  the 
limited available data, there is a considerable discrepancy between the pre-committed budget 
and  the  actual  funding  provided.  This  was  somewhat  mitigated  by  the  introduction  of  an 
additional  “Covid”  call  using  unused  funds.  Following  this  additional  call,  the  Union 
underspending alone was EUR 31,4 million over the lifetime of the programme, representing 
10.9% of the EU commitment.  

The committed grant amounts by the 33 participating countries and the four additional 
non-EU partner countries differed significantly for each country. While the highest grant 
amounts have been committed by Germany (EUR 112 million), the Netherlands  (EUR 102 
million)  and  France  (EUR  74  million),  no  grants  have  been  committed  by  Greece.  Five 
countries  (Germany,  Netherlands,  France,  Sweden  and  Norway)  and  four  non-EU  partner 
countries12 committed almost half of the total committed national budgets (around 49%). As 
outlined in the case study on varying participation, due to the design of the programme there 
is a strong correlation between budget allocation and participation at the national level. Also, 
while  some  participating  countries  offered  support  services  and  promotional  activities  that 
increased  the  visibility  of  the  Eurostars-2  programme  on  the  national  level,  other  national 
funding bodies did not have the financial and human resources to promote the programme on 
the  national  level,  which  resulted  in  an  unequal  level  of  visibility  of  the  Eurostars-2 
programme  in  all  participating  states.    Also,  the  uncertainty  to  get  funding  for  selected 
projects when the contribution of participating countries has been exhausted by higher ranked 
projects  was  a  key  weakness  identified  in  the  Interim  Evaluation.  Due  to  the  lack  of 
information  and  data  provided  for  the  final  evaluation  this  aspect  could  not  be  fully 
examined. However, since the selection process for the partnership did not change since the 
interim evaluation, it cannot be excluded that this issue persisted throughout Eurostars-2. 

The  external  evaluation  points  to  the  role  of  the  Eureka  Secretariat  for  the  successful 
implementation  of  the  programme  because  of  its  broad,  international  network  and  expert 
database with broad knowledge in different technological fields. The Eureka Secretariat did, 
however, by the time of the evaluation, not provide more detailed  monitoring and reporting 
information on project  results allowing to fully assess the effects of the programme nor the 
efficiency of its implementation. 

Effectiveness and impact 

The  programme  followed  a  bottom-up  approach  without  a  predetermined  thematic  or 
technological  focus.  This  resulted  in  different  technological  areas  being  covered  by  the 

12 Switzerland, South Korea, Canada and South Africa. 

5 

 
 
supported projects. A strong focus has been on biological sciences and technologies (35% of 
the projects), followed by electronics, IT and telecoms technologies (22% of the projects).  

According to available information, the Eurostars-2 programme seems to have had a positive 
impact. As around half of the projects were still running at the time of the evaluation, and the 
monitoring  and  reporting  system  did  not  allow  for  a  proper  tracking  of  results,  it  is  not 
possible to draw detailed conclusions on final project results and their impact. Overall, 
beneficiary  SMEs  have  reported  that  they  have  been  successful  in  developing  new  patents, 
and  prototypes  and  received  private  investments  after  the  project  completion.  Most 
commercialised  results  were  products  (53%)  followed  by  services  (28%)  and  processes 
(19%).  Project  results  were  mainly  commercialised  in  Europe  followed  by  North  America 
and Asia. 

Relevance and coherence 

Based  on  the  available  information  and  the  contributions  of  a  few  beneficiaries  and 
stakeholders  for  the  external  evaluation,  Eurostars-2  is  regarded  as  a  relevant  support 
programme  for  SMEs  within  the  European  Research  Area  allowing  different  types  of 
organisations to collaborate with international partners based on national funding provided by 
their  National  Funding  Bodies,  as  national  contact  institutions.  For  SMEs,  the  Eurostars-2 
programme  was  an  important  entry  possibility  for  a  first  international  cooperation.  The 
Eurostars-2  programme  offered  the  opportunity  to  strengthen  the  relationship  with  the 
consortium  partners  as  well  as  to  discover  and  reach  out  to  new  international  markets  and 
contacts.  SMEs  that  have  only  limited  R&I  resources  had  the  possibility  through  the 
programme  to  collaborate  with  other  companies  and  develop  new  intellectual  property  and 
leverage skills that they do not have in their home countries.  

The Eurostars-2 programme was perceived by interviewed stakeholders as a relevant support 
programme to  tackle  existing  market  failures of  SMEs  lacking  innovation  capacities due to 
the degree of risk-taking and resources needed. In this context, the Eurostars-2 support was 
relevant  for  SMEs  to  further  develop  their  innovative  products,  processes  and/or  services 
through transnational knowledge sharing. The programme offered the possibility to initiate a 
cooperative learning process with successful international partners that would not have been 
available  on  the  regional  or  national  level.  Interviewed  beneficiaries  emphasized  that  the 
amount  of  the  grants  was  also  generally  higher  than  at  the  national  or  regional  level  for 
similar activities. 

4.  CONCLUSIONS 

Target group and scope of the programme 

Based  on  the  data  available,  the  Eurostars-2  programme  is  regarded  as  a  relevant  support 
programme for SMEs to develop new and innovative products, processes, and services giving 
SMEs unfamiliar in the field of international funding a first experience in collaboration with 
partners outside their own country. The technological openness and the bottom-up approach 
are perceived as one of the major benefits of the programme. The geographical openness and 
the  possibility  to  collaborate  with  partner  organisations  from  a  broad  range  of  the  33 
participating  countries  and  four  additional  non-EU  partner  countries  is  one  of  the  added 
values of the Eurostars-2 programme compared to regional or national funding programmes 
which often have also lower funding rates. The increasing number of applications throughout 
the 15 cut-offs indicates the existing relevance of the programme for the target groups.  

6 

 
 
Governance and management 

There are strong differences in application and participation rates among participating states 
and  partner  countries.  Five  countries  and  four  non-EU  partner  countries  committed  almost 
half  of  the  total  committed  national  budgets.  This  is  largely  explained  by  the  design  of  the 
programme,  which  means  that  the  budget  allocated  at  the  national  level  is  a  strong 
determinant  of the number of projects  funded with  beneficiaries  from  a given country. The 
countries that provide the strongest input have the most participants. Despite the high success 
rate  of  27%,  funds  were  not  fully  utilised  as  the  evaluation  results  could  not  match  the 
available  national  funding  per  call,  and  an  additional  call  was  launched  to  use  these  funds. 
Overall, findings from the final evaluation indicate that the governance of the Eurostars-2 by 
the  Eureka  Secretariat  is  a  complex  but  adequate  governance  structure  together  with  the 
National Funding Bodies, adapted to the needs of the Eurostars-2 programme.  

Outputs and results of Eurostars-2 projects 

Due to lack of more detailed information on final results and impacts of Eurostars-2 projects 
at the time of the final evaluation, only insights from interviews, desk research and a limited 
number  of  market  impact  reports  are  integrated  into  the  final  evaluation.  Changes  in  IT 
systems, staff replacement and clearer guidance in the project agreement are expected to lead 
to  an  improved  situation  in  the  successor  programme  of  Eurostars-2,  which  is  subject  to 
reporting obligations related to co-fund partnerships under Horizon Europe, with an increased 
focus on impact. With regards to the project implementation and results, a limited number of 
interviews  with  beneficiaries  indicate  that  participants  to  Eurostars-2  projects  seem  to  be 
successful  in  developing  new  processes,  products  or  services  and  receiving  private 
investments after the project completion. 

7