REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE Ex-post evaluation of the Euratom Research and Training Programme 2014-2020
Date: 2024-11-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission
Subjects: EAEC, EU research policy, Framework Programme for Research and Development, nuclear research, nuclear safety, nuclear technology, radioactive waste, research infrastructure, vocational training, waste management

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.11.2024  COM(2024) 549 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE Ex-post evaluation of the Euratom Research and Training Programme 2014-2020 {SWD(2024) 271 final} - {SWD(2024) 272 final}  
 
 
1  Introduction 

1.1  Purpose of the evaluation 

This report presents the results of the ex post evaluation of the Euratom research and training 
programmes for 2014-20181 and 2019-20202 (‘the Programme’)3. The purpose of this report is 
to analyse the rationale, implementation and achievements of the Programme, as well as the 
longer-term impacts and sustainability of measures taken as part of the programme, to inform 
the preparation and design of future Euratom programmes. 

The  evaluation  is  based  on  the  legal  requirement  in  the  regulations  laying  down  the 
programmes4.  The  evaluation  was  carried  out  by  the  Commission  with  the  assistance  of 
independent  experts  selected  on  the  basis  of  a  transparent  process.  The  report  is  structured 
according to the main evaluation questions, ending with conclusions. Annexes to this report 
set  out  the  findings  and  recommendations  from  the  experts  and  the  Commission’s  own 
observations. The evaluation is underpinned by an extensive body of evidence, including: (i) 
four thematic studies prepared by experts on indirect actions taken as part of the programme 
(these  thematic  reports  are  based  on  project  reports,  deliverables  and  interviews  with 
coordinators); (ii) the report from the Commission expert group on direct actions; and (iii) a 
stakeholder consultation. The report is accompanied by two staff working documents, one for 
direct actions and another for indirect actions. These two staff working documents present a 
detailed assessment of the activities of the Programme, the methodology used, and the results 
of the stakeholder  consultation.  The main limitation  of this evaluation  is  that  any  picture of 
the Programme’s results and impacts can only be partial at present. The evaluation is taking 
place  3  years  after  the  end  of  the  Programme,  while  almost  a  third  of  projects  (29)  will  be 
completed in 2024 or 2025. The key challenge for the evaluators is the long timespan required 
for projects to demonstrate their impacts, and this complicates monitoring and the evaluation 
processes. Although the Programme helped to produce important research results, significant 
impacts from these research results (such as the introduction of new solutions and techniques 
by  nuclear  power-plant  (NPP)  operators  and  new  designs  or  influences  on  the  regulatory 
framework) will require more time to become apparent. These long-term effects are also more 
difficult to capture through the usual indicator systems, and often need complex investigative 
work to match outputs from past projects with eventual impacts many years later, sometimes 
in different technical areas. Data limitations include issues related to data availability and the 

1   Council  Regulation  (Euratom)  No  1314/2013  of  16  December  2013  on  the  Research  and  Training 
Programme  of  the  European  Atomic  Energy  Community  (2014-2018)  complementing  the  Horizon  2020 
Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 948). 

2   Council Regulation (Euratom) 2018/1563 of 15 October 2018 on the Research and Training Programme  of 
the  European  Atomic  Energy  Community  (2019-2020)  complementing  the  Horizon  2020  Framework 
Programme  for  Research  and  Innovation,  and  repealing  Regulation  (Euratom)  No  1314/2013  (OJ  L  262, 
19.10.2018, p. 1). 

3   Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty, which is the legal basis for research and training programmes, places a  5-
year limit on the length of these programmes. For this reason, in order to follow the 7-year cycle of the EU’s 
multiannual financial framework, Euratom programmes are proposed first as a  5-year programme followed 
by a 2-year programme. 

4   Art. 22(1) of Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1314/2013 and Art. 22(1) of Council Regulation (Euratom) 

No 2018/1563. 

1 

 
 
 
measurability  of  outcomes.  To  mitigate  these  limitations,  the  staff  working  documents  are 
transparent in indicating their data sources.  

1.2  The Euratom research and training programme (2014-2020) 

The Programme was the EU’s main funding programme for nuclear research for this period`, 
with a budget as set out in the table below. 

2014-2018 
programme 
(EUR) 

2019-2020 
programme 
(EUR) 

Total 
(EUR) 

Direct actions (fission only) 

559 562 000 

268 807 000 

828 369 000 

Indirect actions (fission) 

315 535 000 

151 579 000 

467 114 000 

Indirect actions (fusion) 

728 232 000 

349 834 000 

1 078 066 000 

Total  

1 603 329 000 

770 220 000 

2 373 549 000 

The Programme focused on maintaining the highest nuclear-safety standards and EU’s skilled 
workers in the nuclear domain. To this end, the Programme aimed to: (i) support research and 
training; (ii) improve the safety of existing and future NPPs; and (iii) improve protection from 
ionising 
and 
decommissioning  activities.  In  addition,  the  Programme  funded  the  development  of  fusion 
energy,  a  long-term  option  for  large-scale,  low-carbon  electricity  production,  which  could 
help  address  energy  demand  in  the  future.  The  details  on  the  specific  objectives  of  the 
Programme are provided in Box 1. 

radioactive-waste  management 

radiation, 

including 

through 

safe 

Box 1. Specific objectives for 2014-2020 Euratom programmes 

Indirect actions (research grants)  

Direct actions (by the Joint Research Centre) 

1.  Safety of nuclear systems 
2.  Solutions  for  the  management  of  radioactive 

waste 

3.  Nuclear expertise and excellence in the EU 
4.  Radiation  protection  and  medical  applications 

of radiation 

1.  Nuclear  reactor  and  fuel  safety,  radioactive 
waste  management,  decommissioning,  and 
emergency preparedness  

2.  Nuclear security (safeguards, non-proliferation, 
trafficking,  and  nuclear 

illicit 

combating 
forensics) 

5.  Demonstration  of  feasibility  of  fusion  as  a 

power source 

3.  Nuclear science base for standardisation  
4.  Knowledge  management, 
education 

and 

Innovation and industrial competitiveness 

6.  Preparations for future fusion-power plants 
7. 
8.  Research 
relevance. 

infrastructures  of  pan-European 

training 

5.  Supporting  EU  policy  on  nuclear  safety  and 

security 

The Programme was implemented through: (i) direct actions in fission in the form of research 
carried out by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC); (ii) indirect actions in fission 
and  fusion  through  research  via  competitive  calls  for  proposals  (in  fission  safety,  waste 
management and radiation protection); and (iii) a comprehensive named-beneficiary co-fund 
action  on  fusion  energy  managed  by  the  Commission’s  Directorate-General  for  Research  & 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Innovation (RTD). Euratom fission research falls under both direct and indirect actions, while 
all Euratom fusion research falls under indirect actions managed by DG RTD. 

Euratom research and training programmes have been implemented by the Commission since 
1959.  Council  Regulations  laying  down  these  programmes  set  out  the  broad  lines  of  action 
and set out the indicative financial amount to fund them. Euratom work programmes for direct 
and  indirect  actions  are  adopted  by  the  Commission,  which  set  out  the  detailed  priorities, 
budget and instruments to be used, usually on 2-year basis. 

2  Summary of main findings 

2.1  Programme relevance 

The  general  objective  of  the  Programme  in  2014-2020  was  to  pursue  nuclear  research  and 
training  activities  with  an  emphasis  on  continuously  improving  nuclear  safety,  security  and 
radiation  protection.  Secondly,  the  Programme  also  aimed  to  contribute  to  the  long-term 
decarbonisation  of  the  energy  system  in  a  safe,  efficient  and  secure  way.  The  Programme’s 
objectives  and  scope  were  based  on  the  compromise  reached  by  the  Council  following  the 
Fukushima  nuclear  accident  in  March  2011.  In  line  with  this  compromise,  the  Programme 
aimed  to  ensure the safe use of  nuclear technologies, striking the right  balance between the 
need to support the safety of existing nuclear technologies in Europe and the need to underpin 
safety in the future. 

The results of the evaluation show that the Programme supported highly relevant research and 
training  actions  in  nuclear  safety,  security,  and  radiation  protection,  helping  to  ensure  that 
Europe  meets  the  highest  standards  in  these  fields.  At  the  same  time,  the  Programme 
contributed  to  the  long-term  decarbonisation  of  the  EU  energy  system  by  providing  a 
knowledge  base  and  solutions  for:  (i)  the  long-term  operation  of  existing  NPPs;  (ii)  the 
development  of  fusion  energy;  and  (iii)  the  safety  case  for  advanced  nuclear  systems. 
Consultation  revealed  that  the  Programme  was  also  pertinent  for  research  stakeholders  and 
end-users of nuclear research, i.e. the nuclear industry, operators of power plants, and safety 
authorities. The relevance of actions proposed in the work programmes was also shown by the 
sustained interest in the competitive calls. In line with the work programmes, the Programme 
funded a portfolio of 96 research and training projects, 3 European joint programmes (EJPs) 
and JRC actions supporting research relevant for specific objectives (see table below). 

Specific objective 

Euratom indirect actions launched during 2014-2020  
−  Safety  of  existing  NPPs  and  other  nuclear  installations  including  long-term 

Nuclear safety  

operation: 32 projects 

−  Safety of advanced nuclear systems: 13 projects 
−  Decommissioning & dismantling: 7 projects 
−  Other projects for safety: 6 projects  

Radioactive-waste 
management 

−  Geological  disposal  of  spent  fuel  and  long-lived  radioactive  waste,  predisposal 

research: EURAD joint programme and PREDIS project 

−  Specific  scientific  and  technological  issues  in  waste  characterisation,  treatment, 

disposal and monitoring: 13 projects 

Nuclear expertise 
and excellence 

Radiation 
protection and 
medical 

Support  for  training  and  mobility  activities  maintaining  multidisciplinary  nuclear 
skills:  15  projects  (in  addition,  all  Euratom-funded  research  and  innovation  actions 
dedicated about 4-5% of their budget for training (at PhD level and below)) 
−  Research on the risks from low doses due to industrial, medical or environmental 

exposure: CONCERT Euratom joint programme, RadoNorm project   

−  Optimisation of radiation protection in  medical  applications of ionising radiation 

3 

 
 
 
 
applications of 
radiation 

Fusion energy 
(feasibility, 
preparations for 
future fusion-
power plants, 
innovation) 

Research 
infrastructures 

(imaging, radiotherapy): 4 projects 

−  Research on securing EU production of medical radioisotopes in research reactors: 

1 projects 
Introduction of a new organisation of fusion research (EUROfusion consortium)  

− 
−  Development and implementation of the roadmap focused on: (1) experiments on 
fusion  devices  to  provide  a  basis  for  extrapolations  to  ITER  and  fusion-power 
plants; (2) development of power-plant design and technologies for future fusion-
power plants (materials, breeding blankets, etc.) 

−  Fusion technology transfer to industry (EUROfusion action) 

Support  for  the  qualification  of  innovative  fuel  for  research  reactors  (2  projects), 
securing  access  rights  to  future  research  reactors  (1  project),  support  for  the 
coordinated  use  of  research  reactors  in  Europe  (1  project),  preparations  of  IFMIF-
DONES (1 project)  

Indirect actions (research grants and training actions) 

a)  Safety of nuclear systems 
The  Programme  funded  projects  in  fission  research  focused  on  crucial  safety-related  issues, 
(including issues such as the operational safety of NPPs and safety features for new designs), 
in  line  with  the  work  programmes  and  based  on  feedback  from  ongoing  research.  The 
increasing average age of the fleet of NPPs in Europe required – and still requires – particular 
attention to their ageing and long-term operation strategies. Research is needed to understand 
the degradation mechanisms of safety-relevant components and the impact of this degradation 
on  overall  safety.  The  knowledge  produced  by  this  research  can  support  a  science-based 
assessment  of  the  safety  margins  and  make  possible  the  timely  implementation  of  safety 
improvements. The predictive tools and assessment methods produced by research of this type 
will  benefit  periodic  safety  reviews  of  existing  nuclear  installations.  They  will  also  help 
regulators  to  assess new designs. Research  funded by  the Programme, in particular  research 
on  enabling  the  long-term  operation  of  NPPs,  also  demonstrated  significant  cross-cutting 
benefits of nuclear research for energy and climate policies, as well as for security of energy 
supply. 

b)  Development of safe, longer-term solutions for the management of radioactive waste 
Research  actions  launched  through  subsequent  Euratom  work  programmes  aimed  to  help 
Member States address key issues for the safe and effective management of radioactive waste 
in  the  EU,  as  required  by  Directive  2011/70/Euratom  establishing  a  Community  framework 
for  the  responsible  and  safe  management  of  spent  fuel  and  radioactive  waste.  The  issues 
addressed  by  these  research  actions  included:  (i)  the  safety  of  future  geological  disposal 
facilities; (ii) the conditioning of radioactive waste; (iii) the long-term behaviour of spent fuel 
in a repository; and (iv) the clean-up of decommissioned sites. The Programme’s actions also 
aimed  to  deploy  joint  programming  in  this  field  to  help  Member  States  to  develop  and 
implement their national waste programmes. 

c)  Development and sustainability of nuclear expertise and excellence in the EU 
The Programme funded specific actions to maintain critical skills and capacities in the nuclear 
sector. And in line with work programmes, the Programme dedicated part of the budget of all 
research  and  innovation  actions  to  this  end.  The  use  of  nuclear  technologies  in  all  areas  of 
application as well as nuclear safety and security require a highly specialised workforce and 
preservation  of  the  knowledge  base.  The  overall  workforce  situation  in  the  EU  was  –  and 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
continues to be – at risk due to retirements and a decline in the number of students studying 
relevant subjects. 

d)  Radiation protection and the development of medical applications of radiation 
Through  calls  for  proposals,  the  Programme  funded  actions  which:  (i)  enabled  a  better 
understanding of the harmful effects of radiation from natural and artificial sources; and (ii) 
helped  expand  the  beneficial  applications  of  radiation  technologies,  in  particular  in  the 
medical  field  (imaging  and  radiotherapies).  Actions  selected  for  funding  in  2014-2020, 
included in particular  the CONCERT European joint programme (EJP)5. This EJP followed a 
new approach promoted by European platforms for research in radiation protection in the five 
key  areas  of:  low-dose  risks;  dosimetry;  emergency  and  preparedness;  radioecology;  and 
medical  applications.  Further  multidisciplinary  research  that  integrates  different  scientific 
communities is needed to determine the mechanisms involved  in these risks and to quantify 
the risks of latent cancers and vascular diseases at these low doses. 

e)  Fusion energy research (demonstration of feasibility, power-plant preparations) 
The  evaluation  highlights  the  relevance  of  Euratom-funded  actions  for  making  progress 
towards two of the Programme’s specific objectives: demonstrating the feasibility of fusion as 
a power source and preparing for future fusion-power plants. To achieve this progress (97% 
of milestones achieved in 2020), the organisation of Euratom-funded fusion research required 
a  new  approach,  as  mandated  by  the  Council  Regulation.  In  2014,  European  fusion 
laboratories  set  up  a  new  research  organisation,  the  EUROfusion  consortium,  which 
implemented  an  EJP  centred  around  the  fusion  roadmap  and  based  on  eight  thematic 
‘missions’.  The  fusion  roadmap  represented  a  comprehensive,  detailed  and  goal-oriented 
approach to developing magnetic-confinement fusion as an energy source. Its implementation 
enabled  considerable  progress  towards  establishing  the  scientific  basis  for  constructing  and 
exploiting  ITER6,  the  international  nuclear  fusion  research  project,  and  advancing  the 
technical  basis  for  a  future  fusion-power  plant.  The  new  organisation  allowed  national 
laboratories  with  substantial  national  co-funding  (45%  of  the  consortium’s  budget)  to  join 
forces in the exploitation of common research facilities by  5 815 researchers, engineers and 
support staff (734 active doctoral students in 2020), leading to a wide variety of discoveries 
and  knowledge  creation  (through  5 350  peer-reviewed  publications).  The  relevance  of 
EUROfusion  actions  was  confirmed  by  ITER  and  the  Euratom  Scientitic  and  Technical 
Committee. 

Direct actions by the JRC 

The  ex  post  evaluation  has  demonstrated  the  relevance  of  the  direct  actions  against  the 
specific  objectives  by  the  Programme,  namely:  (i)  improving  nuclear  safety  and  nuclear 
security;  (ii)  increasing  excellence  in  the  nuclear  science  base  for  standardisation;  (iii) 
fostering knowledge management, education and training; and (iv) supporting nuclear-related 
policies.  By  meeting  these  objectives,  the  JRC’s  nuclear  research  has  helped  to  address 

5   Since  Horizon  Europe  and  the  Euratom  Programme  2021-2025,  EJPs  have  been  renamed  European 

Partnerships. The terminology used in the Euratom Programmes 2014-2020 is retained here. 

6   See https://www.iter.org/ 

5 

 
 
 
 
existing  needs and  challenges in  the nuclear field, therefore displaying  continued  relevance. 
The  relevance  was  continuously:  (i)  ensured  through  necessary  changes  to  the  JRC’s  bi-
annual work programme, (ii) examined against the Programme’s specific objectives; and (iii) 
adjusted to changes in the nuclear landscape.  

Over the evaluated period, the relevance of the JRC’s activities was also verified through its 
research on nuclear materials. This research both: (i) strengthened the safety analysis for the 
possible long-term operation of the EU’s current nuclear fleet; and (ii) laid the ground for the 
safety  assessment  of  new  nuclear  designs  such  as  small  modular  reactors  (SMRs).  Direct 
research on reference materials has helped to harmonise the measurement of radioactivity in 
the  environment  inside  and  outside  the  EU,  meeting  the  overall  objective  of  increased 
standardisation.  The  JRC’s  expertise  also  assisted  in  the  implementation  of  the  Euratom 
nuclear  safeguards  system.  In  2014-2020,  the  development  by  the  JRC  of  the  EUSECTRA 
training  centre  was  instrumental  in  meeting  the  objective  of  strengthening  nuclear-security 
capacities  in  the  EU  Member  States  by  training  more  than  1 600  front-line  and  law-
enforcement  officers  in  nuclear  detection  and  forensics.  Long-standing  expertise  and 
breakthrough  research  by  the  JRC,  enabled  by  the  direct  actions  in  the  field  of  medical 
applications of nuclear science, also had a significant impact for cancer treatment. 

Through  its  activities,  the  JRC  supported  the  objectives  of:  (i)  building  and  maintaining 
essential  skills;  and  (ii)  supporting  knowledge  management  in  the  fields  of  nuclear  safety, 
security  and  safeguards  in  the  EU.  This  was  also  made  possible,  in  large  part,  through  the 
open-access  programme  to  its  research  facilities,  which  benefited  84  institutions  from  23 
Member  States  and  associated  countries  over  the  evaluated  period,  producing  140  scientific 
papers and enabling the achievement of 64 PhD theses as direct outputs. 

The  independent  technical  and  scientific  expertise  acquired  by  the  JRC  through  the 
Programme supported other European Commission DGs in three areas of implemention. This 
supported  the  implementation  of  Council  Directives  on  nuclear  safety6,  spent  fuel  and 
radioactive-waste  management7,  shipments  of  radioactive  waste  and  spent  fuel7,  and  basic 
safety  standards8.  JRC’s 
the 
implementation of the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation8 and addressed nuclear and 
radiological aspects of the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace9.   

technical  and  scientific  expertise  also  contributed 

to 

To fulfil the objectives laid out in the Programme, the JRC participates in the appropriate fora, 
networks  and  technological  platforms  such  as:  (i)  SNE-TP  (Sustainable  Nuclear  Energy 
Technology Platform); (ii) IGD-TP (Implementing Geological Disposal for radioactive waste 
Technology Platform); (iii) the EERA (European Energy Research Alliance) joint programme 
on nuclear materials; and (iv) the European Nuclear Education Network Association. The JRC 
has  also  concluded  collaboration  instruments  with  a  variety  of  partners,  including:  (i)  key 
stakeholders from EU research institutions; (ii) international partners (such asthe International 

7   Council Directive 2006/117/Euratom of 20 November 2006 on the supervision and control of shipments of 

radioactive waste and spent fuel. 

8   Council  Regulation  (Euratom)  No  237/2014 of  13  December  2013  establishing  an  Instrument  for  Nuclear 

Safety Cooperation. 

9   Regulation (EU) No 230/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing 

an instrument contributing to stability and peace. 

6 

 
 
 
Atomic  Energy  Agency  and  the  OECD-Nuclear  Energy  Agency);  and  (iii)  institutions  from 
non-EU countries like the US Department of Energy or Japan’s Atomic Energy Agency. The 
goal  of  the  collaboration  instruments  with  these  partners  is  to  identify  the  critical  areas  of 
nuclear  research  where  the  JRC’s  nuclear  activities  are  most  relevant  and  present  a  critical 
interest for the Euratom Community.  

2.2  Programme effectiveness 

Evidence from completed and ongoing actions indicates that direct and indirect actions have 
made  a  tangible  contribution  to  achieving  all  of  the  Programme’s  objectives  across  the 
board10.  

Indirect actions – Fission 

By the end of 2020, the Commission had published five calls for proposals in fission research. 
There  were  98  projects  selected,  engaging  an  estimated  workforce  of  around  8 000  people 
including 200 scientific managers (2.5% of the 8 000 engaged), 5 000 experienced researchers 
(62.5%), 500 researchers (6.25%), 800 PhD students partially or full-time on a project (10%) 
and 1 500 in other sectors (engineers, technicians, administrative support) (18.75%).  

The  projects  on  nuclear  safety  produced  many  relevant  results.  In  some  cases,  these  results 
made significant progress on the original state-of-the-art in the main areas of safety and long-
term  operation  of  existing  NPPs,  future  concepts  and  decommissioning.  The  main 
achievements include: 

• 

• 

the  setting  up  of  advanced  computer  models  and  simulations  for  safety  analysis  – 
including in the event of severe accidents – of different reactor systems (Generation II 
and III of NPPs); 

the preparation of strategies to manage severe accidents to ensure in-vessel retention 
of the melted reactor’s core; 

•  contribution to the safety demonstration and assessment of generic design Generation 

IV reactors as well as testing and qualification of safety-relevant components; 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

the  production  of  databases  on  accident  scenarios  for  all  existing  and  new  types  of 
NPPs in Europe; 

the production of databases on irradiated materials and models for assessing the long-
term integrity of primary systems and components; 

the preparation of protocols for fatigue-testing NPP components; 

the design and testing of innovative backup cooling systems that can be retrofitted into 
existing NPPs and included in future NPPs; 

the  development  of  advanced  materials  for  nuclear  systems,  including  computer 
models to evaluate radiation effects, and the development of new structural materials 
and their stress testing; 

10   For more details see accompanying Staff Working Documents. 

7 

 
 
 
 
• 

tools  and  methods  for  safe  decommissioning  and  dismantling,  which  should  reduce 
risks. 

In  some  cases,  outputs  and  deliverables  are  already  being  used  by  project  stakeholders 
(industries, utilities, transmission-system operators, safety authorities, etc.) and end-users.  

The  Programme  has  been  successful  in  the  area  of  radiation  protection  by:  (i)  bringing 
together several research platforms, organisations and institutions for the very first time in the 
EU; and (ii) developing the very first joint roadmap for radiation protection. Lessons learned 
from  the  drafting  of  this  first  roadmap  are  already  reflected  in  the  development  of  a  more 
specific strategic research agenda (SRA) in the medical field as part of the EURAMED rocc-
n-roll project. In addition, the CONCERT platform conducted the very first calls making use 
of  the  lessons  learned  from  other  calls  under  EJPs.  In  parallel  with  the  preparation  of  the 
SRA, 13 fundamental  research projects  were successfully conducted with promising results. 
The  Programme  made  a  clear  contribution  to  risk  assessment,  the  optimisation  of  radiation 
protection  and  the  management  of  both  radon  and  naturally  occuring  radioactive  materials 
(NORM).  

There were major achievements in 2014-2020 in the geological disposal of radioactive waste 
and  spent  fuel,  such  as:  (i)  the  granting  of  licences  for  repositories  in  crystalline  rock  in 
Finland and Sweden; (ii) the construction and operating-licence application for a repository in 
clay  in  France;  and  (iii)  siting  progress  (e.g.  in  Switzerland).  This  indicates  that  different 
concepts of geological repositories in various host rocks have reached the necessary scientific 
and technological  maturity  to  support safety  assessment and industrial  deployment.  In those 
advanced Member States, strong national R&D programmes and Euratom projects co-funded 
over  the  decades,  including  the  projects  under  review,  were  essential  to  reach  the  current 
status  in  implementing  repositories  of  spent  fuel  and  high-level  waste.  Throughout  the 
successive programmes, the uncertainties (e.g. in relation to disposal performances and safety 
margins),  were  progressively  identified  and  addressed  at  the  right  level.  Consequently,  the 
knowledge base made it possible to build a solid case when it comes to safety. First steps have 
now been taken to identify areas for optimisation and potential technological innovations. 

Indirect actions – Fusion 

Although  fusion  energy  remains  a  long-term  endeavour,  the  evaluation  shows  that  in  2014-
2020  the  EUROfusion  consortium  made  incremental  progress  following  the  roadmap, 
achieving 97% of the milestones set for 2014-2020.  

The EUROfusion consortium has also substantially reduced risks and improved the projected 
ITER performance, increasing confidence that ITER, once completed, will reach its baseline 
goals. The record-breaking 59MJ of fusion energy achieved at the Joint European Torus (JET) 
on  21 December 2021  is  a  clear  success  and  the  crowning  achievement  of  the  Programme. 
While  the  JET  result  provides  the  headline  goals  and  integrated  scenarios  for  ITER,  it  is 
backed  by  substantial  progress  in  the  understanding  of  the  plasma  physics  of  confinement. 
Predictive simulation  tools  have been validated  against experimental results  across different 
labs in Europe. 

8 

 
 
Progress  has  also  been  made  in  specific  technologies  for  future  fusion-power  plants 
(materials, breeding blankets, etc.) and the DEMO11 design effort. Candidate materials have 
been selected for all components of future fusion reactors, requiring a test facility for fusion 
materials. The engineering work behind the DEMO pre-conceptual design has brought much 
greater clarity to both a number of critical design issues and the overall integration challenge. 

Nevertheless, DEMO research has not yet led to a conceptual design of sufficiently low risk 
to proceed to engineering design, particularly with regard to scenarios concerning plasma and 
power handling.  

In  the  area  of  education  and  training,  data  from  EUROfusion  shows  a  positive  trend  in  the 
number  of  doctorates  working  on  relevant  subjects  (increasing  by  9%  year-on-year  to  734 
PhD students in 2020) and post-doctoral fellows (increase of 100% to 34 per year in 2020). 
This should maintain the number of fusion researchers at a level required for implementation 
of the roadmap. 

Taken as a whole, fusion research supported by the Programme is a step towards ensuring that 
the  EU  has  the  know-how  and  skills  to  operate  ITER  once  completed,  while  advancing  in 
parallel  on  the  scientific  and  technical  basis  of  a  future  fusion-power  plant.  These  dual 
objectives  were  –  and  remain  –  fundamental  to  the  development  of  fusion  as  an  energy 
source.  The  relevance  of  these  actions  becomes  even  more  apparent  when  seen  in  a  more 
recent context, characterised by: (i) intensifying international competition in the area of fusion 
research,  including  for  talent;  (ii)  the  emergence  of  a  private  sector  active  in  the  field, 
including start-ups; and (iii) strong investor interest. 

Direct actions – Fission 

The  evaluation  of  the  effectiveness  of  the  JRC  activities  confirmed  the  JRC’s  impact  on 
science and policymaking in the areas identified by the specific objectives of the Programme. 
In fact, the JRC’s contribution was instrumental in shaping and supporting the implementation 
of EU policies in those areas,  as illustrated by the following specific case studies, which were 
selected  and  evaluated  by  independent  experts.  These  activities  contribute  to  effectively 
meeting  each  of  the  specific  objectives  set  for  the  direct  actions  as  demonstrated  by  the 
following case studies: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

the EU’s Clearinghouse on Operating Experience for NPPs; 

the  JRC’s  participation  in  the  European  Safeguards  Research  and  Development 
Association; 

the open access given to the JRC’s nuclear research facilities; 

research on targeted alpha therapy; 

the  CBRN  (chemical,  biological,  radiological  and  nuclear)  threats  centres  of 
excellence; 

11 The DEMOnstration power plant, for more information see https://euro-fusion.org/programme/demo/ 

9 

 
 
 
• 

research  on  spent  fuel  characterisation  to  help  improve  the  safety  assessment  of 
extended interim storage; 

•  support  for  the  implementation  of  the  Instrument  for  Nuclear  Safety  Cooperation 

(INSC); 

• 

the implementation of the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace. 

The activities evaluated  were deemed to  achieve  long-term  societal impacts  in  over 90% of 
cases,  adressing  environmental,  social  or  health  issues.  The  evaluation  also  noted  an 
improvement  in  the  JRC’s  interactions  with  stakeholders  and  its  policy  relevance.  The  JRC 
made  a  noticeable  contribution  to  scientific  knowledge  by  producing  well-cited  and  peer-
reviewed  work  published  in  top  scientific  journals.  Overall,  based  on  the  assessment  of  its 
research activities, the JRC is a competent and effective science and knowledge service. 

Objective  1:  Improving  nuclear  safety  (including  in  nuclear  reactors  and  fuels,  waste 
management and emergency preparedness):  

JRC  research  helped  to  improve  the  safety  of  nuclear  reactors  and  fuels,  and  supported  the 
safety  assessment  of  ageing  NPPs  for  long-term  operation  through  the  development  of 
software  for  accident  modelling;  tools  and  reference  data;  and    codes.  This  research  also 
supported the safety and performance analysis of conventional nuclear fuels. Through the EU 
Clearinghouse for Operating Experience Exchange, operated by the JRC, nuclear safety  has 
been  improved  by:  (i)  sharing  best  practices;  (ii)  producing  topical  studies;  and  (iii) 
maintaining  data  and  analysis  on  incident  occurences  in  nuclear  installations.  The  JRC  also 
provided  technical  expertise  to  maintain  and  operate  the  EURDEP  system  to  exchange 
radiological data and the ECURIE system to carry out the early notification of a radiological 
accident  or  emergency,  thus  supporting  the  fulfilment  of  the  Council  Decision  87/600 
(ECURIE Arrangements) and the Recommendation 2000/473/ Euratom.  

On innovative technologies and Generation IV systems, the JRC carried out underpinning and 
applied  research,  focusing  on  radioactive  waste  management,  nuclear  safety  and  the 
proliferation  resistance  of  advanced  nuclear  systems.  This  research  contributes  to  the  safety 
assessment  of  innovative  nuclear  technologies.  The  development  and  potential  future 
contribution to a sustainable energy system of these technologies (in those Member States that 
decide to use them) have an impact on EU policies. In this context, the JRC is also Euratom’s 
implementing agent on the Generation IV International Forum.  

Direct  actions  in  the  area  of  radioactive-waste  management  covered  scientific  and  technical 
aspects  relevant  to  a  sound  strategy  for  radioactive  -waste  management.  The  direct  actions 
also  supported  the  development  of  regulatory  and  licensing  procedures  for  the  geological 
disposal  of  spent  fuel  and  high-level  radioactive  waste.  Research  outputs  stemmed  from 
investigating the characteristics of spent fuel, as well as the properties and behaviour of spent 
fuel rods during storage.  

Objective  2:  Improving  nuclear  security  (including  safeguards,  non-proliferation, 
forensics and illicit trafficking) 

10 

 
 
For  nuclear  safeguards  and  non-proliferation,  the  JRC  helped  to  develop  and  support 
safeguard  technologies  through  R&D,  equipment  development,  and  trainings  for  Euratom 
inspectors  to  ensure  the  effective  implementation  of  the  Euratom  safeguards  regime.  Such 
technical support was also provided to both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
through the European Commission’s Support Programme and to other stakeholders in order to 
strengthen the international safeguards regime. Other research activities (such as information 
collection, analysis, and studies on dual-use goods) aimed to strengthen the EU’s nuclear non-
proliferation regime. Nuclear security is a field in high demand amongst EU Member States, 
and the JRC’s expertise in this area has focused on: (i) the detection of – and response to – 
illicit  trafficking  of  nuclear  and  other  radioactive  materials;  and  (ii)  capacity-building 
activities.  

Objective 3: Increasing excellence in the nuclear science base for standardisation 

In  the  field  of  environmental  monitoring  and  radiation  protection,  research  has  aimed  at 
harmonising  the  radioactivity  measurements  performed  by  national  laboratories  through 
various activities, including comparison exercises across laboratories to train staff across EU 
Member  States.  The  JRC’s  state-of-the-art  experimental  nuclear  facilities  enabled  the 
production  of:  (i)  nuclear  data;  (ii)  reference  materials  measurements;  and  (iii)  conformity 
tools.  These  helped  to  keep  nuclear  data  up-to-date  and  available,  directly  contributing  to 
international reference-data libraries. 

Objective 4: Fostering knowledge management, education and training 

The research infrastructure was made accessible to external users from EU Member States via 
the open-access programme, as a way to complement national research and optimise the use 
of highly specialised infrastructure within Euratom. This enabled the JRC to continue playing 
a  key  role  in  knowledge  management,  education  and  training.  The  JRC  also  promoted 
knowledge and training through various courses and trainings.  

Objective 5: Supporting EU policy on nuclear safety and security 

The  JRC’s  technical  expertise  helped  support  a  variety  of  activities  in  nuclear  safety  and 
security.  For  example,  the  JRC  supported  the  implementation  of  the  Directive  on  the  safe 
management  of  radioactive  waste  and  spent  fuel,  by  reviewing  national  programmes  and 
periodic national reports. The JRC also supported the implementation of safeguards in the EU 
as part of the legal obligation derived from Chapter 7 of the Euratom Treaty. The JRC carried 
out dedicated activities to develop concepts, tools and methodologies directly supporting EU 
policy in this area. Improving nuclear safety outside of the EU has also been achieved through 
the  Instrument  for  Nuclear  Safety  Cooperation,  the  effective  implementation  of  which  is 
supported by the JRC.  

In  the  area  of  nuclear  security  and  CBRN  risks,  the  JRC  has  supported  Commission 
programmes in non-EU countries through the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace. 

2.3  Programme efficiency 

Indirect actions 

11 

 
 
Overall, the ex post evaluation shows a high level of efficiency in both the Commission’s own 
management  (e.g.  grant  management  and  proposal  evaluation  for  indirect  actions)  and 
implementation  by  research  consortia.  The  Commission  kept  its  own  administrative 
expenditure for indirect actions well below the average of 6.5% of the operational budget for 
2014-2020.  Simplification  measures  introduced  from  the  start  of  Horizon  2020  and  the 
Programme have greatly improved efficiency, in particular for the time-to-grant metric.  

By 2020, five calls had been published under the Programme and, by the time these calls were 
were  closed,  254  eligible  proposals  had  been  submitted,  requesting  a  total  financial 
contribution  of EUR  726  million.  Of  these  eligible  proposals, 98 were  selected  for  funding, 
with a Euratom contribution of EUR 415 million. 

The average time-to-grant for the Programme was 238 days (from 313 days for the Euratom 
programme 2007-2013). 

Analysis of the efficiency of the EJPs in fusion research, radiation protection and radioactive 
waste,  in  particular  in  the  areas  of  management  and  governance,  is  especially  important  as 
these instruments account for 75% of the budget for indirect actions. 

The organisational  architecture  for  fusion research underwent  a major restructuring with the 
launch of the Programme. Fusion research had long  been a field  apart due to:  (i) the nature 
and  scale  of  the  undertaking;  (ii)  the  unique  mix  of  instruments  used;  and  (iii)  the 
Commission’s unique coordination role which, despite gradually diminishing since the 1990s, 
was  still  unlike  what  happens  in  other  fields.  To  effectively  implement  the  2012  fusion 
roadmap, the organisation of fusion research supported through the Programme needed a new 
approach12. 

Following an independent evaluation, in 2014 the Commission awarded a 5-year grant to the 
EUROfusion  consortium  of  national  fusion  laboratories  and  institutes  to  implement  an  EJP 
based on the fusion roadmap. In 2019, following the adoption of the Regulation establishing 
the Euratom Programme 2019-202013, the EUROfusion grant was prolonged until the end of 
2022.  The  total  budget  contribution  from  Euratom  to  the  EJP  was  EUR 679 million, 
representing 51% of the consortium’s total budget. The extension beyond 2020 provided for a 
smooth  transition  to  a  co-funded  European  partnership  in  fusion  research  –  EUROfusion  – 
still active today. 

The  effective  integration  of  all  national  efforts  across  Europe  represents  a  first  for  EU-
supported research and includes comprehensive research activities in some 33 separate work 
packages  (projects  and  taskforces).  These  separate  work  packages  cover  education  and 
training  actions,  international  cooperation  aspects,  industrial  involvement,  centralised 
programme management, and the efficient use of key resources through a truly transnational 
access  approach  to  key  facilities.  Programme  and  project  management  –  and  their  related 

12   This  new  approach  was  first  presented  in  the  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  Towards  a  Modern 

Euratom Fusion Research Programme (SWD(2013(213). 

13   Council Regulation (Euratom) 2018/1563 of 15 October 2018 on the Research and Training Programme of 
the  European  Atomic  Energy  Community  (2019-2020)  complementing  the  Horizon  2020  Framework 
Programme  for  Research  and  Innovation,  and  repealing  Regulation  (Euratom)  No  1314/2013  (OJ  L  262, 
19.10.2018, p. 1). 

12 

 
 
 
to 

the  Commission,  which 

governance  structures  –  have  become  more  transparent,  with  information  now  readily 
available 
retains  overall  monitoring  and  assessment 
responsibilities.  Evaluation  also  showed  that  EUROfusion’s  2014-2020  organisational 
structure was fit for purpose to continue to implement the fusion roadmap into the 2021-2025 
programming period, assuming that the scope and breadth of the roadmap remains similar to 
2014-2020. 

JRC direct actions  

Evaluation  experts  acknowledged:  (i)  efforts  made  to  introduce  a  common  project-
management  methodology  across  the  JRC;  and  (ii)  the  increase  in  efficiency  created  by 
gathering  all  nuclear  activities  under  one  directorate.  The  total  budget  allocated  for  direct 
actions during the evaluated period of 2014-2020 was EUR 828 369 000. 

During the same period, the JRC received an additional EUR 30 million per year as a specific 
credit  to  fund  the  decommissioning  programme  of  some  of  its  obsolete  nuclear  research 
facilities. While this financial contribution was separate from the budget for direct actions, the 
expenses  for  JRC  staff  involved  in  decommissioning  activities  were  borne  by  the  research 
budget. 

In  the  budget  execution  for  JRC  direct  actions,  overall  staff  costs  represented  55%  of  the 
budget, accounting for 710 people at the beginning of the reporting period in 2014, gradually 
reduced  to  660  by  2020.  This  included  staff  carrying  out  activities  under  direct  actions 
(around  47%)  staff  assigned  to  infrastructure,  maintenance  and  radiation  protection  (around 
12%), staff engaged in decommissioning activities (11%) and staff working in other support 
functions (29%). 

In order to ensure the efficient monitoring of the JRC’s performance as part of the research 
programmes, an organisation-wide yearly review is carried out. This exercise aims to measure 
both  productivity  and  impact,  assessing  policy-support  outputs  and  scientific  publication  in 
peer-review journals on the one hand and the policy-support impact of the output on the other.  

Over the period 2014-2020, a variety of policy-support outputs (1 114 scientific and technical 
reports, 147 technical systems, 154 training courses) were delivered to specific users and in 
support to EU policies. Through the JRC’s direct actions, a large number of scientific outputs 
were  also  produced,  with  1 076  articles  and  conference-proceedings  contributions  published 
in  peer-reviewed  periodicals;  444  articles  contributed  to  monographs  or  published  in  other 
periodicals; and 51 books or chapters of books.  28 PhD  dissertations were also successfully 
completed by students who benefitted from the access to JRC facilities. Based on bibliometric 
indicators and impact metrics, the JRC’s performance in terms of research publication ranked 
well  above  average  with  a  respectable  productivity,  featuring  amongst  the  most  cited 
publications or in the most cited journals.  

All these outputs have resulted in the provision of scientific support to EU policies, with 373 
tangible  impacts  identified  during  the  evaluation  period.  The  COVID-19  pandemic  had  a 
significant negative impact on research activities in 2020 and resulted in some delays in the 
delivery  of  outputs.  Nevertheless,  a  number  of  mitigating  measures  were  put  in  place, 
ensuring  continuity  of  the  highest  priority  work  in  areas  such  as  the  nuclear  safeguards 

13 

 
 
laboratories.  The  issue  of  open  access  to  JRC  nuclear  facilities  (made  difficult  because  of 
lockdown restrictions) was also partially circumvented via remote monitoring of experiments, 
and a number of training courses were made available virtually.  

The  interim  evaluation  report  of  the  Euratom  Programme  for  2014-2018  had  recommended 
that  the  JRC  provide  proof  of  its  cost-effectiveness.  In  response  to  this  recommendation,  a 
comparative  study  was  carried  out  on  three  projects  under  indirect  actions  where  the  JRC’s 
role  was  particularly  relevant.  This  study  showed  that  the  cost-effectiveness  of  the  JRC’s 
participation  was  in  line with  that of other partners.  Although  experts  also recommended  in 
their  evaluation  that  the  JRC  should  develop  key  performance  indicators  for  measuring  the 
efficiency  of  its  science  for  policy  support,  it  is  worth  mentioning  that  a  complete  set  of 
indicators has now been proposed for the 2021-2025 Euratom programme. This complete set 
of indicators will help to measure the impact pathway in the short , medium and long-term. 

2.4  Programme coherence and EU-added value 

The Programme was coherent internally and with other EU programmes and policies. Within 
the Programme itself, the Commission ensured links between fission and fusion research by 
supporting  projects  addressing  topics  relevant  to  both  fields,  such  as  materials  research  and 
tritium  management.  Synergies  and  complementarities  between  direct  and  indirect  actions 
were also ensured through the JRC’s participation in 38 projects out of the 86 granted under 
the indirect actions (as a member of research consortia) and by giving access to its research 
infrastructures to a variety of researchers. 

This guaranteed the overall sharing of expertise and know-how. The JRC ensured coherence 
across the five specific objectives of direct actions described in the Programme and between 
the  different  research  areas  (safety  and  radioactive  waste  management;  security  and 
safeguards;  education  and  training;  and  knowledge  management).  Moreover,  in  order  to 
promote good cooperation between the different areas of activity, a new structure was adopted 
in  2016  inside  the  JRC  to  group  all  responsibility  for  the  implementation  of  the  Euratom 
direct  actions  under  a  single  directorate.  This  led  to  improved  communication  and 
transparency, and had a positive impact on the effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of the 
activities carried out. 

Coherence with other EU programmes and policies was assured through the JRC services and 
indirect  actions’  grant  requirements  to  support  implementation  of  Euratom  Directives  and 
Instruments14. Possible areas of improvement include the need to exploit synergies with other 
thematic  areas  of  Horizon  Europe  in  order  to  address  cross-cutting  aspects  such  as  health, 
space energy systems and civil security research.  

The  Programme’s  external  coherence  with  research  programmes  carried  out  by  both  EU 
Member States and international organisations was ensured through careful alignment of the 
scope of activity of the JRC. It was also ensured through the JRC’s own participation in and 
exchanges with: (i) technology platforms or networks (such as SNE-TP (Sustainable nuclear 
energy TP), IGD-TP (Implementing Geological Disposal TP) or the EERA joint programme 
on  Nuclear  Materials);  and  (ii)  associations  like  the  European  Nuclear  Education  Network. 

14 

See Section 1.3. 

14 

 
 
 
 
Bilateral  cooperation  agreements  with  external  stakeholders  also  served  to  support  the 
coherence  of  the  JRC’s  work  under  the  Programme  at  EU  and  global  level.  These  external 
stakeholders  also  included  the  IAEA,  the  Organisation  for  Economic  Co-operation  and 
Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA), and non-EU countries. 

The  Programme’s  EU-added  value  stemmed  from  the    ability  to  mobilise  a  wider  pool  of 
excellence,  expertise  and  multidisciplinarity  in  fission  and  fusion  research  than  would  have 
been possible by individual Member States acting on their own.  

This is demonstrated in the area of fission by the diverse portfolio of projects launched under 
the Programme. Another example is  the joint  exploitation  of fusion-research infrastructures, 
which relies on the collective endeavours of researchers and engineers supported by Euratom 
funding  from  all  across  Europe  (about  8 300  people  during  the  period  covered  by  the 
Programme). This broad-based coordination is of particular benefit to smaller Member States 
which can take advantage of the economies of scale afforded by the pooling effect. In fusion 
research, this is exemplified by smaller laboratories that can specialise in scientific topics or 
subsystems  for  fusion-research  facilities  in  Europe  to  make  significant  contributions  while 
maintaining visibility in the European consortium.  

The  EU-added  value  of  the  direct  actions  was  grounded  in  the  JRC’s  unique  position  as  an 
independent  and  long-standing  technical  and  scientific  service,  which  supports  the 
preparation,  implementation  and  monitoring  of  EU  policies,  in  particular  the  Nuclear 
Directives15 (i.e. the Nuclear Safety, Basic Safety Standards, Safety of Radioactive Waste and 
Spent  Fuel,  and  Shipments  of  Radioactive  Waste  and  Spent  Fuel  Directives).  Another 
example  was  in  the  area  of  safeguards,  where  JRC  expertise  was  essential  in  providing  the 
necessary support to the Euratom safeguards system. 

Overall,  through  the  Programme,  the  JRC  was  able  to  develop  further  knowledge  and 
maintain skills and expertise, therefore bringing added value to Euratom. This is exemplified, 
for example, in: 

• 

• 

• 

the  pooling  of  operational  experiences  in  the  EU  through  the  Clearinghouse,  which 
contributes to improved nuclear safety; 

the  access  to  JRC  nuclear  infrastructures  as  part  of  EU  projects,  allowing  external 
users to perform experiments not possible in their home organisation; 

the manning of an EU security-training centre providing training in nuclear safeguards 
and security to front-line officers, or the coordination of Euratom’s research efforts in 
Generation  IV  systems  as  Euratom  implementing  agent  in  the  Generation  IV 
International Forum. 

15 

See Section 1.3 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
3  Conclusions  and  lessons  learned  to  feed  into  the  decision-making 

process 

3.1  Conclusions 

The evaluation concludes that the Programme significantly supported nuclear safety, security 
and radiation protection in the EU, helping to ensure that Europe meets the highest standards 
in these fields. At the same time, the Programme contributed to the long-term decarbonisation 
of  the  EU  energy  system  by  providing  a  knowledge  base  and  solutions  for  the  long-term 
operation of existing NPPs. The Programme also helped to advance both: (i) the knowledge 
and technologies necessary for the development of fusion energy; and (ii) the safety case for 
advanced nuclear systems.  

The  evaluation  provides  a  number  of  important  conclusions,  six  of  which  are  set  out  in  the 
paragraphs below. 

1.  Through  cooperative  research,  the  Programme  enabled  a  Europe-wide  approach  to 
both:  (i)  the  improvement  of  nuclear  safety  and  radiation  protection  in  all  areas  of 
application;  and  (ii)  the  challenge  of  developing  fusion  as  an  energy  source.  The 
Programme  significantly  increased  the  EU’s  ability  to  mobilise  a  wider  pool  of 
excellence,  expertise  and  multidisciplinarity  in  nuclear  research,  achieving  impacts 
that extend far beyond  what  would  have been  achieved at  national  or regional level. 
This  is  of  particular  benefit  to  smaller  Member  States,  which  were  able  to  take 
advantage of economies of scale afforded by the Europe-wide pooling effect and open 
access to JRC facilities. 

•  402  organisations  participated  in  EJPs  for  research  in  radiation  protection, 

radioactive-waste management and fusion 

•  A doubling  in the number of researchers travelling outside their home institution 
(from  872  in  2014  to  1734  in  2020)  to  work  on  the  joint  exploitation  of  fusion 
experimental facilities 

•  84 institutions from 23 Member States benefited from open access to JRC facilities 

The evaluation showed  important involvement of Member States which joined the EU 
after 2004 as 89% of projects involved at least one entity from these Member States. 
Member  States  not  using  nuclear  power  participated  mainly  in  projects  on  radiation 
protection,  medical  applications  and  radioactive-waste  management.  Some  Member 
States,  like  Austria,  Denmark,  Greece,  Ireland  and  Portugal,  also  participated  in 
research on nuclear safety and nuclear data to maintain skills in these areas.  

2.  The Programme played a significant role in maintaining critical skills and capacities in 
the  nuclear  sector.  Euratom  projects  involved  around  13 815  researchers,  engineers 
and  support  staff  (8 000  in  fission  and  5 815  in  fusion),  providing  a  supporting 
environment  for  the  exchange  of  ideas  and  for  training  a  new  generation  of 
researchers. 

• 

Increased support for PhDs in fusion – from 675 per year in 2014 to 734 in 2020 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  About 800 PhDs involved in fission projects  
•  JRC training of 1 600 law-enforcement officers in nuclear detection and forensics 

for nuclear security 

The Programme’s results will be assessed against a profoundly changed policy context 
today.  This  changed  policy  context  is  marked  by:  (i)  the  new  geopolitical  and 
economic  reality  (EU’s  decarbonisation  targets,  the  drive  for  energy  security,  and  a 
focus on the safety and security of existing installations); and (ii) increased interest in 
nuclear  energy  and  research  needs  (emerging  technologies  such  as  SMRs).  This 
changed  policy  context  has  boosted  interest  in  the  nuclear  field  and  highlighted  a 
variety of new needs for research. 

3.  There was a substantial over-subscription rate for research grants in Euratom calls for 
proposals (2.6 proposals submitted for each project selected). This indicates: (i) a high 
level of interest in both the research community and in industry; and (ii) a high level 
of  capacity  in  both  the  research  community  and  in  industry  for  excellent  research 
projects. The competitive nature of the Euratom funding process further increased the 
quality  of  proposals,  ensuring  that  research  was  conducted  in  areas  of  significant 
relevance for nuclear safety and radiation protection. Data also show that there was a 
significant mobilisation of public and private funding from stakeholders participating 
in Euratom research projects and EJPs.  

•  EUR 161 million mobilised from stakeholders in fission research 
•  EUR 555 million mobilised from the EUROfusion consortium 

This  indicates  that  although  there  is  a  clear  demand  for  more  public  funding, 
mobilising funds from private and public stakeholders is still possible and will be even 
more  necessary  in  the  future  to  advance  Euratom  objectives.  Mobilising  public  and 
private  funding  will  be  especially  necessary  to  both:  (i)  retain  and  foster  industrial 
value  chains  and  overall  competitiveness  in  the    EU  nuclear  sector;  and  (ii)  use  the 
innovation potential of the EU private sector to accelerate the development of fusion 
technology. 

4.  Research funded by the Programme demonstrated the significant cross-cutting benefits 
of  nuclear  research  for:  (i)  energy  and  climate  policies;  (ii)  the  security  of  energy 
supply; and (iii) non-power applications, in particular in healthcare. 

Impacts  on  the  security  of  energy  supply  –  maintaining  the  safety  of  existing  and 
future NPPs and ensuring their long-term operation  

•  Advanced modelling and simulation for NPP safety analysis (projects 

CAMIVVER, McSafe, McSafer, IVMR and MUSA) 

•  Tools and data for ensuring the long-term integrity of key components of existing 
NPPs (STRUMAT-LTO, NOMAD, SOTERIA, ENTENTE, FRACTESUS, 
ATLAS+, APAL) 

•  Development  of  an  innovative backup  cooling  system  that  can  be  retrofitted  into 
existing NPPs and included in future NPPs (projects sCO2-HeRo, sCO2-4-NPP) 

17 

 
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
•  Development  of  advanced  materials  for  nuclear  systems,  including  computer 
models to evaluate radiation effects, development of new structural materials and 
their stress testing (projects M4F, GEMMA and ORIENT-NM) 

Impacts on EU healthcare (medical imaging and cancer treatment) 

•  Solutions for securing the EU production of medical radioisotopes  – research for 
qualification  of  the  nuclear  fuel  for  European  research  reactors  (Projects  LEU-
FOREvER, EU-QUALIFY, HERACLES-CP) 

•  Solutions  to  optimise  radiation  protection  for  oncology  patients  (projects 

SINFONIA, HARMONIC, MEDIRAD) 

•  Vision for future research – roadmap on medical applications of ionising radiation 

to improve patients’ lives (project EURAMED)  

5.  Results  from  the  Programme  indicate  there  has  been  some  improvement  in  gender 
balance.  While  similar  figures  are  shared  by  many  other  engineering  and  scientific 
sectors, it is clear that gender inequality in nuclear research must be addressed much 
more vigorously under the current and future Euratom programmes. 
• 
• 

In fission-research projects, women accounted for 29% of researchers  
In fusion-research projects the percentage of woman increased from 18% to 23% 
of researchers 

6.  The evaluation of the Programme highlighted the need for better communication and 
visibility  for  nuclear  research,  which  will  also  help  to  improve  both  the  quality  of 
scientific  assessment  and  the  uptake  of  research  results.  The  Commission  will 
encourage  further  outreach  towards  policymakers  and  other  key  stakeholders.  In  its 
new  nuclear  strategy  for  2021-2025,  the  JRC  has  already  drawn  up  a  plan  for 
systematic and targeted communication on nuclear activities.  

3.2  Lessons learned 

The ex post evaluation has yielded significant evidence-based findings, highlighting key areas 
for improvement. 

For indirect actions in fission research (nuclear safety), the evaluation suggests that efficiency 
could  be  improved  by  supporting  larger,  more  integrated  projects  encompassing  all  the 
different issues and aspects of a particular topic, for example, the effects of ageing in reactor 
pressure  vessels.  To  guarantee  an  appropriate  engineering  approach  and  system  integration, 
the  evaluation  said  that  European  industry  should  coordinate  safety  projects  related  to 
developing new power reactors. Work should also continue on integrating the research done 
with  the  support  of  the  Euratom  grants  (indirect  actions)  with  both:  (i)  the  relevant  work 
carried  out  at  the  national  level;  and  (ii)  relevant  work  carried  out  through  Euratom  direct 
actions  (carried  out  by  the  JRC).  Finally,  the  evaluation  recommended  that  international 
cooperation should be increased to include relevant research under the auspices of the IAEA 
and the OECD-NEA. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The  evaluation  has  identified  a  need  for  improved  reporting  by  consortia  implementing 
Euratom-funded fission projects. Clear, concise, and factual reporting is crucial to provide a 
comprehensive understanding of the projects’ progress, achievements and expected outcomes.  

The  evaluation  shows  that  further  progress  in  research  on  advanced  nuclear  systems  will 
require  concentrating  efforts  and  resources  on  the  few  advanced  nuclear  systems  and 
applications that are really of interest to European industry.  

Experts  recommended  to  get  involved  and  engage  with  relevant  non-nuclear  and  non-
traditional  partners  in  advancing  nuclear  research.  Examples  of  areas  in  which  nuclear 
research  could  develop  include:  artificial  intelligence;  advanced  manufacturing;  3D  printing 
applied  to  nuclear  technologies;  integrated  and  hybrid  energy  systems;  and  nuclear  energy 
applications  other  than  those  generating  electricity  (like  nuclear  heat,  hydrogen  production, 
decarbonisation  of  energy-intensive  industries  and  nuclear  desalination).  Synergies  between 
fusion  and  fission  should  be  further  developed,  not  only  in  the  traditional  area  of  advanced 
materials but also in: artificial intelligence; non-power applications; advanced modelling and 
simulation; and experimental tests. 

In research on radiation protection, the evaluation indicates that a multidisciplinary approach 
could  be  further  encouraged  to  increase  coverage  of  a  broader  spectrum  of  scientific 
questions,  including  low-dose  risks  and  several  other  questions  related  to  planned,  existing 
and  emergency  exposure  situations.  The  radiation-protection  roadmap  prepared  by  the 
CONCERT  EJP  and  SRA  in  the  medical  applications  of  ionising  radiation  provide  a  sound 
basis for future state-of-the-art calls and should be systematically developed.  

The  evaluation  shows  that,  given  the  progress  achieved  in  radioactive-waste  management, 
research  should  progressively  depart  from  the  acquisition  of  pure  scientific  knowledge  to 
instead  focus  on  the  operation,  closure  and  oversight  of  deep  geological  facilities.  The 
governance of a joint programme should integrate this evolution by strengthening the role of 
waste-management organisations and technical safety organisations. The ethical basis for the 
strategic  choices  made  in  radioactive-waste  management  and  disposal  also  deserve  more 
attention. 

While  the  Programme  made  substantial  progress  in  fusion  energy,  this  research  field  has 
changed  rapidly  in  recent  years  as  international  competition  increases  and  a  vibrant  private 
sector  working  on  fusion  emerges  globally.  The  evaluation  shows  that,  to  proceed  with  the 
engineering design of a future fusion-power plant, the Euratom programme should focus now 
and in the coming few years on identifying the critical issues and risks and determining how 
much  risk  is  acceptable.  Innovation  will  then  be  needed  to  address  critical  enabling 
technologies for fusion energy and to mitigate related risks. While the Programme helped to 
make substantial progress in our understanding of plasma physics for ITER and beyond, there 
is  also  a  need  to  develop  computational  tools  to  further  predict,  analyse,  and  interpret 
experimental results. A future fusion-power plant also requires efficient project engineering. 
Although  efficient  project  engineering  is  expected  to  be  delivered  by  industry,  Euratom-
funded  actions  could  include  a  project-engineering  and  management-training  scheme 
combined with specialised fusion knowledge. 

19 

 
 
Next steps: The insights and conclusions drawn from this final evaluation of the Programme 
are set to play a significant role not only in shaping the ongoing implementation of the 2021-
2025  programme  but  also  in  influencing  policy  development  for  future  nuclear  research 
initiatives.  Most  of  the  observations  made  by  independent  experts  have  already  been 
addressed  in  the  ongoing  2021-2025  Euratom  programme  (see  Annex  for  details).  The 
evaluation also identified a number of challenges for Euratom-funded research such as: (i) the 
quality of reporting and data availability; (ii) the need for the evolution of fusion research; and 
(iii)  fission  partnerships  taking  into  account  the  changing  research  landscape.  These  issues 
will  be  taken  into  account  alongside  the  upcoming  interim  evaluation  of  the  current  2021-
2025 programme, when presenting the Commission proposal for the extension of the Euratom 
programme for 2026-2027 and for the next multiannual financial framework. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex  1  -  Recommendations  by  the  experts  on  indirect  actions  and  the 
Commission’s response 

Recommendations on fusion research 

1.  To  proceed  with  the  engineering  design  of  a  future  fusion-power  plant,  Euratom 
programmes  should  focus  now  and  in  the  coming  few  years  on:  (i)  identifying  the 
critical issues and risks; and (ii) determining how much risk is acceptable. Innovation 
will  be  therefore  needed  to  mitigate  these  risks.  The  real  challenge  will  be  to  put  in 
place a process to identify and prioritise these innovations and to incorporate them in 
the Euratom programme.  

2.  While the Programme  helped make  substantial  progress  in understanding the plasma 
physics for  ITER and beyond, there is  a need to  further develop computational tools 
under  the  Euratom  programme  for  2021-2025  to  predict,  analyse  and  interpret 
experimental results. These tools can be then used to produce comprehensive between-
shot analysis for ITER. 

3.  A  future  fusion-power  plant  requires  efficient  project  engineering.  Although  this 
element  is  expected  to  be  delivered  by  industry,  EUROfusion  should  consider 
developing  a  training  scheme  for  project  engineering  and  management  adapted  to 
specialised fusion knowledge.  

Commission’s response 

The Commission shares the experts’ views and aims to improve fusion research funded by the 
Euratom  programme.  The  fusion-research  landscape  is  changing  rapidly  as  international 
competition  is  increasing  and  a  vibrant  private  sector  in  the  area  of  fusion  is  emerging 
globally.  European  fusion  know-how  and  industrial  capacity  may  be  lost  if  the  way  we 
organise our research is not adapted and if the innovation potential of the private sector in the 
EU  is  not  put  to  use  to  accelerate  technology  development.  An  important  step  would  be  to 
support innovation in the EU on critical enabling technologies for fusion energy.  

The interim evaluation of the ongoing Euratom programme for 2021-2025 will address a wide 
range  of  issues  essential  to  accelerating  the  delivery  of  fusion  electricity.  Following  the 
conclusion  of  the  interim  evaluation,  the  Commission  intends  to  put  forward  a  proposal  to 
extend  the  Euratom  programme  for  2026-2027,  in  which  the  most  pressing  issues  will  be 
addressed. 

Recommendations on fission research and the Commission’s response 

1.  To  increase  the  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  indirect  actions  in  nuclear  safety,  the 
Commission  should  favour 
integrated  projects 
the  submission  of 
encompassing  all  the  different  issues  and  aspects  of  a  particular  topic,  for  example  the 
effects  of  ageing  in  reactor  pressure  vessels.  Funding  should  be  increased  to  support 
education  and  training,  knowledge  management,  the  development  of  skills,  and  staff 
capacity. It is of paramount importance to integrate the work done with the support of the 
Euratom grants  (indirect actions)  and through Euratom direct  actions  (carried out  by the 
JRC)  with  the  relevant  work  carried  out  at  national  level.  To  guarantee  an  appropriate 
engineering  approach  and  system  integration,  all  safety  projects  related  to  the 

larger,  more 

21 

 
 
 
development of new power reactors should be coordinated by European industry. Finally, 
international cooperation should be increased to include the IAEA and the OECD-NEA. 

Commission’s  response:  in  the  2021-2025  programme,  the  Commission  introduced 
provisions  that  already  address  some  of  these  recommendations.  Less  prescriptive  call 
topics than in previous programme give the consortia more freedom in self-organisation, 
thus increasing efficiency. Our plan for larger projects that systematically support access 
to  education,  training  and  infrastructures  should  improve  the  situation  in  the  long-term. 
Integration of the Programme’s direct and indirect actions should be further strengthened 
by introducing the access to JRC’s facilities and know-how to consortia in Euratom calls 
for proposals. The Programme’s interim evaluation will assess these actions and provide 
further guidance for future Euratom support. 

2.  It  is  time  for  Euratom  to  streamline  support  for  research  activities  and  concentrate  its 
efforts  and  resources  on  the  few  advanced  nuclear  systems  and  applications  in  which 
European  industry  has  a  real  interest.  Other  systems  which  are  of  no  interest  to  EU 
industry should not be funded or, if they are funded, it should only be to maintain general 
skills. 

Commission’s response: the 2021-2025 programme focuses on advanced nuclear systems, 
for  which  research  projects  can  provide  a  scientific  basis  for  regulators  to  assess  safety 
and  demonstrate  compliance  with  nuclear-safety  Directives.  Following  the  evaluation  of 
the  call,  the  Programme  launched  projects  based  on  the  highest  quality  proposals  and 
backed  by  solid  consortia,  including  from  the  research  community  and  industry.  The 
Programme’s interim evaluation will evaluate these actions and provide further guidance 
on future Euratom support for advanced systems. The Commission will also consider the 
evolving  industrial  and  research  landscape,  including  the  results  of  the  SMR  industrial 
alliance and work under the Net Zero Industrial Act. 

3.  The  quality  of  reporting  from  consortia  implementing  Euratom-funded  fission  projects 
could  be  improved.  Reports  should  describe  in  a  clear,  concise  and  factual  way:  (i)  the 
progress  made  with  respect  to  the  initial  state-of-the-art;  (ii)  the  gaps  covered;  (iii)  the 
main  achievements;  and  (iv)  the  expected  outcomes.  The  reports  should  also  include 
reference to interactions with existing and potential end-users of research results.  

Commission’s  response:  the  Commission  will  work  with  consortia  to  ensure  that  the 
quality of reporting is improved and focused on the elements highlighted by the evaluation 
to facilitate project monitoring and future  evaluation of the Programme. To this end, the 
Commission  will use its powers as granting authority to  request  periodic  report changes 
before making subsequent grant payments. 

4.  For  the  most  innovative  topics  and  technologies  which  already  have  a  wide  application 
outside the nuclear community, it is highly recommended that to engage with and involve 
relevant  non-nuclear  and  non-traditional  partners.  Examples  of  areas  in  which  nuclear 
research  could  develop  include:  artificial  intelligence;  advanced  manufacturing;  3D 
printing  applied  to  nuclear  technologies;  integrated  and  hybrid  energy  systems;  and  the 
application  of  nuclear  energy  other  than  for  generating  electricity  (such  as  nuclear  heat, 
hydrogen  production,  decarbonisation  of  energy-intensive 
industries  and  nuclear 
desalination). 

Commission’s  response:  support  for  cross-sectoral  synergies  that  leverage  progress  in 

22 

 
 
various sectors to increase nuclear safety is essential for the Commission in the ongoing 
Euratom  programme  for  2021-2025.  The  Commission  also  puts  a  strong  emphasis  on 
addressing  the  safety  aspects  of  alternative  applications  of  nuclear  energy.  Finally,  the 
Programme provides funding for developing non-power applications of ionising radiation 
in the medical  field and  in other innovative areas such as:  (i) nuclear techniques for EU 
strategic autonomy (production and recovery of raw materials); (ii) the circular economy 
(reduction  of  non-radioactive  waste);  and  (iii)  monitoring  climate  change  and  pollution. 
The  Commission  addressed  these  topics  in  the  2021-2025  Euratom  calls  for  proposals, 
which will be discussed in detail in the interim evaluation. 

5.  Synergies between fusion and fission research should be further developed, not only in the 
traditional  area  of  advanced  materials,  but  also  in  the  use  of  artificial  intelligence,  non-
power applications, advanced modelling and simulation; and experimental tests. 

Commission’s  response:  under  the  ongoing  2021-2025  programme,  the  Commission  is 
pursuing the development of fission-fusion synergies in fields such as  the harmonisation 
of  safety  assessment,  tritium  management,  and  nuclear  data.  The  Commission  also 
emphasises the further use of fusion technologies in  non-power applications through the 
EUROfusion  technology-transfer  programme.  The  Commission  addressed  these  topics 
both  in  Euratom  calls  for  proposals  and  via  the  EUROfusion  partnership,  which  will  be 
discussed in detail in the interim evaluation.  

6.  A  multidisciplinary  approach  should  be  further  encouraged  in  radiation  protection. 
Euratom  should  increase  its  coverage  of  a  broader  spectrum  of  scientific  questions,  not 
only on low-dose risks but also on several other questions related to planned, existing and 
emergency exposure situations. 

Commission’s  response:  the  Commission  has  tasked  PIANOFORTE,  a  new  co-funded 
European  partnership 
in  radiation  protection,  with  adopting  a  comprehensive, 
multidisciplinary  approach  to  research  and  innovation  in  this  field  under  the  2021-2025 
programme. PIANOFORTE’s calls for proposals confirm this approach, by including calls 
on  issues  such  as  threats  arising  from  war,  armed  conflict,  natural  disasters,  and 
emergency preparedness and response for novel  nuclear technologies. The Programme’s 
interim  evaluation  will  assess  these  actions  and  provide  further  guidance  for  future 
Euratom support for the partnership. 

7.  The  SRA  in  the  field  of medical  applications  of  ionising  radiation  and  related  radiation 
protection,  prepared  together  with a  corresponding  roadmap  by  the  EURAMED  rocc-n-
roll  project,  provides  an  excellent  basis  for  future  state-of-the-art  calls.  SRAs  should  be 
systematically  developed  in  all  areas  of  planned,  existing  and  emergency  exposure 
situations. The joint roadmap for radiation protection prepared by CONCERT EJP might 
be a good starting point.  

Commission’s  response:  with  the  Euratom  grant  award  and  establishment  of  the 
PIANOFORTE  partnership  in  2022,  a  dedicated  stakeholders’  forum  exists  today  to 
discuss  and  further  develop  SRAs  and  research  roadmaps  in  radiation  protection  and 
related  fields.  These  documents  will  both  shape  PIANOFORTE  actions  and  inform  the 
implementation of other actions under the Euratom programme. The Programme’s interim 
evaluation  will  assess  these  actions  and  provide  further  guidance  on  future  Euratom 

23 

 
 
support for radiation protection. 

technical 

(WMOs), 

8.  EURAD’s  research  in  radioactive-waste  management  is  the  result  of  a  joint  decision 
process  between  waste-management  organisations 
safety 
organisations  (TSOs)  and  research  entities,  enabling  a  balanced  approach  to  research 
needs.  However,  the  chosen  research  directions  are  still  strongly  in  line  with  previous 
Euratom  actions.  Considering  that  disposal  facilities  are  currently  already  licensed 
(Finland,  Sweden)  or  under  licensing  review  (France),  research  should  progressively 
depart from the acquisition of pure scientific knowledge  and instead focus on operation, 
closure  and  oversight.  The  governance  of  EURAD  should  integrate  this  evolution  by 
strengthening the role of the WMOs and TSOs and allowing an earlier and more effective 
role  for  the  External  Advice  Committee  in  deciding  on  research.  Research  will  have  to 
evolve  to  a  strategic  level  to  tackle  emerging  issues  of  common  interest.  The  ethical 
foundation of the fundamental strategic choices made for  radioactive-waste management 
and disposal also deserves more attention. 

Commission’s  response:  in  2024  the  Commission  aims  to  launch  a  co-funded  European 
partnership on radioactive-waste management (EURAD-2). The Commission has already 
put in place several requirements to improve the organisation of research in this field, in 
particular  to:  (i)  consolidate  knowledge  on  the  safe  start-up  and  operation  of  geological 
disposal  facilities;  and  (ii)  support  Member  States  with  less  advanced  national 
programmes.  EURAD-2  must  also  engage  in  regular  interactions  with  regulatory  bodies 
and  industrial  stakeholders  to  make  the  future  partnership  comprehensive.  Additionally, 
EURAD-2 will need to be more inclusive and reach out to the Member States that did not 
participate  in  EURAD,  as  the  scope  of  the  partnership  covers  all  Member  States  with 
radioactive-waste  inventories  and  is  not  limited  to  countries  with  nuclear  power.  The 
Programme’s interim evaluation will assess progress and guide future Euratom support. 

24 

 
 
 
 
Annex 2 - Recommendations by the Commission Expert Group on direct 
actions and Commission’s response 

Recommendations on prioritisation of work  

1.  The JRC should be involved at  an  early stage in priority-setting  among  policy DGs, 
and  set  up  a  centralised  process  for  ensuring  that  the  work  programme  reflects  both 
these  priorities  and  the  breadth  of  knowledge  needed  to  support  the  priorities.  This 
process  should  also  incentivise  policy  DGs  and  the  JRC  to  break  silos  and  integrate 
suitable workstreams. 

2.  The panel encourages the JRC to systematically develop and apply criteria in relation 
to its unique strengths and policy relevance for deciding whether to engage/disengage 
in a particular activity. 

Commission’s response 

The panel of experts highlighted that, considering the breadth of activities covered by the JRC 
direct actions: (i) there was some room for the JRC to better focus resources on activities with 
the highest impact; and (ii) there were some areas in which the JRC is uniquely positioned to 
provide the necessary scientific evidence. The JRC’s new nuclear strategy comprises a whole 
set  of  actions  aimed  at  prioritising  its  work  and  clearly  setting  priorities  for  current  and 
prospective activities.   

The panel pointed out a certain lack of integration of the various activities carried out in the 
JRC, saying that this sometimes led to a fragmented approach. In order to counter this trend, 
the JRC has reorganised its work programme by introducing portfolios. These portfolios aim 
to provide an integrated view and better coordination of the relevant  activities under clearly 
defined priorities.  

The anticipation of research and policy needs from other DGs in the European Commission is 
ensured through planned cluster meetings with several DGs in order to set priorities based on 
a  coordinated  assessment.  In  these  meetings,  several  DGs  of  the  European  Commission  are 
invited to express and discuss their priorities with the JRC. Within the nuclear area, the JRC 
holds  additional  coordination  meetings  with  partner  DGs  in  charge  of  research  and 
innovation,  energy,  international  partnerships,  internal  affairs,  etc.  for  exchanges  on  future 
needs.  

Overall, the experts found a good awareness within the JRC of its unique strengths, including 
its  independence,  solid  scientific  foundation,  long-standing  expertise,  sharing  of  research 
facilities  with  other  researchers,  and  ability  to  provide  continuity  of  research  where  other 
actors are tied by different  imperatives. These JRC strengths complement  itsits  new nuclear 
strategy,  and  reinforcing 
the 
identified  strengths 
implementation  of  the  JRC’s  strategy  plan,  including  prioritising  and  optimising  research 
infrastructures and the open-access programmes.  

largely  compatible  with 

these 

is 

Recommendations on a holistic approach to nuclear and non-nuclear activities 

1.  The JRC should use more holistic approaches in designing  both its work programme 
and  its  response  to  policy  needs.  It  should  develop,  as  part  of  its  business  model,  a 
strategic plan for integrating social sciences into its research. 

25 

 
 
2.  The JRC should integrate social-science research into Euratom activities, in particular 
in the area of risk assessment, crisis preparedness, and response, and make use of the 
approaches that are developed for the JRC as a whole. 

3.  The  JRC  should  further  embed  the  concept  of  resilience  and  the  green  and  digital 

transition in the Euratom part of its work programme. 

Commission’s response 

The need for a more holistic, multidisciplinary integration of policy priorities was underlined 
by  the  experts,  who  pointed  out  the  added  value  of  addressing  social-science  aspects  in 
nuclear research. Under the reorganisation of the work programme, the portfolios were set up 
with the idea of improving collaboration and interaction between the nuclear and non-nuclear 
domains.  Integration  across  disciplines  will  therefore  unfold  by  design  over  time.  For 
instance, efforts  to  integrate social-science  research  have been made within the portfolio on 
risk  and  crisis  management,  where  nuclear  risk  is  now  being  assessed  using  a  holistic 
approach  alongside  other  CBRN  risks  developed  by  another  non-nuclear  directorate  of  the 
JRC. Similar cooperation with social scientists also takes place on the topic of SMRs as part 
of  research  into  the  non-electricity  applications  of  nuclear  technology  such  as  hydrogen 
production, district heating, and medical applications of nuclear science. This approach aims 
to  increase  the  JRC’s  impact  on  policy  and  share  expertise/resources,  all  while  covering 
different aspects of the same challenge.  

This  integrated  approach  between  nuclear  and  non-nuclear  activities  is  also  targeted  in  the 
implementation  of  the  JRC’s  nuclear  strategy.  The  experts  also  noted  that  opportunities  for 
integrating  cross-cutting  issues  such  as  digitalisation,  artificial  intelligence  or  machine 
learning should be assessed in the areas of nuclear security, safeguards and radioactive waste 
management.  Efforts  to  integrate  these  cross-cutting  issues  in  the  JRC’s  work  have  been 
reflected in reshaped governance and the new portfolio-based structure. The advanced use of 
digital  technologies  is  now  the  specific  focus  of  a  new  directorate  in  the  JRC  and,  more 
specifically,  of  a  unit  in  the  nuclear  directorate,  targeting  nuclear  safeguards  and  non-
proliferation research, but with the potential to be expanded further to other areas. 

Recommendation on communication 

1.  The JRC should develop  a communication strategy to  improve its  communication at 
different levels,  customising this communication to different target groups and using 
the most suitable channels (digital or traditional) to reach these groups. 

Commission’s response 

The  experts  highlighted  an  opportunity  to  improve  communication  at  different  levels:  (i) 
within  the  JRC;  (ii)  between  the  JRC  and  the  European  Commission;  and  (iii)  between  the 
JRC and its external stakeholders. This would provide more clarity on the research conducted 
by the JRC and the tangible impacts it achieved. A strand of actions within the JRC’s nuclear 
strategy  aims  to  address  this  issue  by  emphasising  more  strategic  communication  and  the 
identification of target audiences, as well as better cooperation with relevant stakeholders.  

Recommendation on resources 

1.  The  JRC  should  implement  a  proactive  talent-acquisition  approach  at  all  levels  of 
seniority, with the aim of putting in place a more diverse workforce, in particular with 

26 

 
 
regard  to  gender  balance.  This  applies  to  external  recruitment  but  also  to  suitable 
internal development programmes to incentivise and motivate potential candidates. 

Commission’s response 

Due  to  the  reduction  of  the  Euratom  budget  under  the  2021-2027  multiannual  financial 
framework,  the  JRC  is  facing  a  challenging  situation  in  developing  and  maintaining  the 
skilled  workforce  it  needs.  Notwithstanding  this  issue,  the  JRC  has  included  a  strand  of 
actions in its nuclear strategy targeting skills and staff aspects to try to mitigate the impact of 
this reduction over time. This exercise aims to ensure that knowledge is efficiently managed 
keeping in mind the necessary critical skills that must be retained or replaced. It also aims to 
recuit  diverse  new talent (within  the current  stringent  constraints)  to  integrate highly  skilled 
future staff likely to trigger innovation in line with the evolving priorities of the JRC.  

To more effectively pool nuclear expertise and knowledge inside and outside of the JRC, the 
strategy intends to optimise the management of staff and reduce fragmentation by integrating 
similar  research  activities  in  single  locations  in  the  JRC  sites.  Experimental  activities 
involving the use of nuclear and radioactive materials will be integrated in only two JRC sites: 
Geel, in Belgium, and Karlsruhe, in Germany. 

Recommendations on monitoring impact and efficiency 

1.  The JRC should review the indicators for measuring impact, taking into consideration 
current Commission initiatives on reforming research-assessment methodologies. 

2.  The JRC should develop key performance indicators for measuring the efficiency of 

its science for policy support. 

Commission’s response 

The  panel  of  experts  acknowledged  both:  (i)  the  difficulty  of  measuring  efficiency  in  a 
research context; and (ii) the efforts made by the JRC, in response to the interim evaluation 
recommendation,  to  provide  evidence  of  its  cost-effectiveness.  The  JRC  assessed  the 
engagement of resources and outputs derived from its participation in several projects under 
indirect  actions  against  that  of  other  consortium  partners.  While  the  interpretation  of  these 
comparisons  is  not  always  clear  cut,  the  JRC  determined  that  its  cost-effectiveness  was 
similar to that of other partners. The experts also noted the recent introduction of a common 
project-management  methodology  across  the  JRC  and  the  pooling  of  nuclear  research 
activities under one directorate to improve efficiency. 

Additionally, in the course of drafting the Euratom programme for 2021-2025, a complete set 
of impact indicators was reviewed and incorporated into the programme as part of the Council 
Decision.  These  include  indicators  for  short-,  medium-  and  long-term  impacts,  considering 
scientific, societal, innovation and policy dimensions.  

Recommendations on nuclear safety, security and skills 

1.  On  SMRs,  in  addition  to  studying  regulatory  aspects,  the  JRC  should  also  focus  on 

safety, security, and safeguards approaches for these new technologies. 

2.  The JRC should strengthen its skills to support activities related to spent nuclear fuel 
disposal  and  develop  strategies  to  capture  and  share  best  practices  from  EU  and 
national projects with all EU Member States. 

27 

 
 
Commission’s response 

The  panel  of  experts  recognised  that  by  building  and  maintaining  skills  in  nuclear  safety, 
security and safeguards,  the JRC had served both EU and Member State policymaking. The 
panel  also  encouraged  the  JRC  to  continue  responding  to  and  focusing  on  a  number  of 
challenges  and  drivers,  in  particular  new  technologies  like  SMRs  but  also:  (i)  the 
decommissioning  of  NPPs;  (ii)  long-term  operation  issues;  (iii)  cyber  security;  (iv) 
safeguards; and (v) open access to nuclear infrastructures.  

Acknowledging that regulation of nuclear safety is a national responsibility, the JRC, as part 
of  the  reorganisation  of  its  work  programme,  has  grouped  activities  under  a  dedicated 
portfolio  on  SMRs.  Its  goal  is  for  this  portfolio  to  focus  on  desktop,  simulation  and 
experimental R&D in part to support the licensing process by helping to harmonise practice 
and  guidelines  at  EU  level.  Other  portfolios,  such  as  NUCTEC,  address  the  other  relevant 
topics mentioned such as the long-term operation of NPPs and the management of spent fuel 
and  radioactive  waste.  The  open  access  to  nuclear  infrastructures  is  included  as  much  as 
possible  in  relevant  research  projects.  Overall,  the  drivers  for  new  research  indicated  above 
feature among the priorities identified in the JRC nuclear strategy, with the partial exception 
of  decommissioning,  which  is  now  the  subject  of  a  separate  instrument16  addressing:  (i) 
operational  decommissioning  activities  of  the  JRC;  (ii)_,  as  well  as  management  and 
dissemination of knowledge on decommissioning.  

In particular, the experts highlighted an opportunity to improve the selection of objectives and 
activities supporting nuclear-safety policies in order to follow any changes in the demands for 
the  energy  systems.  The  experts  also  stressed  that  ensuring  the  continuity  of  European 
resources  in  nuclear  safety  and  security  is  paramount  to  be  able  to  respond  to  unexpected 
events and crises. The JRC’s attention and response to shifting priorities/needs related to both 
nuclear-safety  standards  and  nuclear  security  is  reflected  in  the  evolution  of  its  own  work 
programme.  This  is  particularly  evident  in  the  response  given  to  specific  events,  like  the 
nuclear-safety  assessment  of  the  situation  following  the  Russian  aggression  and  invasion  in 
Ukraine.  The  JRC  also  helped  to  draw  up  sanctions  on  Russia,  based  on  strategic  trade 
analysis and export-control expertise developed for non-proliferation purposes. 

Recommendations on anticipation and foresight 

1.  The  JRC  should  develop  foresight  activities  for  nuclear  energy  to  support  the  green 

transition and promote the resilience of the energy system. 

2.  The JRC should: (i) give anticipation capacities a high priority, as set out in the JRC 
2030 strategy; (ii) allocate sufficient resources; and (iii) set up a governance structure 
to optimise efforts. 

3.  The JRC should build capacities and tools to prepare for and respond to future shocks. 
To  this  effect,  it  should  invest  in  collecting  and  maintaining  data  on  past  and  future 
shocks. 

Commission’s response 

The  JRC  implements  anticipation  as  a  priority  within  its  nuclear  activities  by  both:  (i) 
maintaining  permanent  contact  with  its  main  partners  and  stakeholders;  and  (ii)  exploring 

28 

 
 
 
 
arising needs and trends in the nuclear fields at both EU and international level. The JRC also 
participates  in  European  technological  platforms  and  associations  that  gather  the  main 
stakeholders and provide guidance on research priorities in related nuclear areas.  

Anticipation  and  foresight  are  embedded  in  the  portfolio  approach  and  integrate  aspects 
related  to  crisis  anticipation.  This  is  the  case  for  the  portfolio  on  situational  awareness  for 
crisis  management,  which  integrates  all  capacities  within  the  JRC  for  risk  analysis,  risk 
assessment, and early warning. This includes specific nuclear activities like the operation of 
two alert systems, EURDEP and ECURIE.  

The emphasis on foresight is one of the priorities identified in the JRC nuclear strategy. The 
Directorate for Nuclear Safety and Security at the JRC also operates its own foresight network 
and  activities  as  part  of  a  regular  ‘horizon  scanning’  effort,  which  also  includes  other  non-
nuclear directorates. Plans are also ongoing to deploy a ‘futures scenario’ exercise in line with 
a  similar  endeavour  undertaken  by  the  IAEA  in  2022  on  safeguards.  A  foresight  workshop 
with external stakeholders was organised before the end of 2023. 

JRC management has put in place flexible working mechanisms that will make it possible to 
pool resources usually allocated to research, coordination or support activities for responding 
to unanticipated shocks. 

Recommendation on safeguards 

1.  The  JRC  should  maintain  a  strong  research  programme  for  nuclear  safeguards  and 

non-proliferation. 

Commission’s response 

The experts acknowledged the essential role of the JRC in supporting and developing nuclear 
safeguards  and  non-proliferation  in  the  EU  and  globally.  Sufficient  staff  and  infrastructures 
should therefore be ensured for the experimental work and modelling activities. The relevance 
of  maintaining  a  strong  research  programme  in  safeguards  is  included  in  the  JRC’s  nuclear 
strategy. An important element in this capacity is the JRC’s direct contribution to the Euratom 
safeguards,  necessitating  sufficient  numbers  of  skilled  staff  and  experimental  infrastructure 
availability.  Due  to  the  budget  reduction  and  pressure  put  on  staff  availability,  the  nuclear 
strategy intends to concentrate all experimental activities and laboratories  used  with  nuclear 
and  radioactive  materials  on  two  research  sites  (Karlsruhe  and  Geel)  and  will  evaluate 
opportunities for joint implementation of activities with Euratom safeguards. 

The  JRC  maintains  a  strong  research  programme  for  safeguards  and  non-proliferation  by 
interacting with relevant key players in the EU through networking and collaboration within 
the  European  Safeguards  Research  and  Development  Association.  The  JRC  also  provides 
significant scientific and technical support to the IAEA through the European Commission’s 
dedicated  support  programme  on  safeguards.  In  the  area  of  non-proliferation,  the  JRC 
provides  expertise  on  strategic  trade-control  issues  and  further  integrates  work  between  the 
nuclear and non-nuclear parts of its work programme.  

29