Territoriality and multi-level governance of missions : exploring the role of local and regional actors in mission-oriented innovation and industrial policies.
Date: 2025-09-18
Institutions: Joint Research Centre
Subjects: EU policy, EU regional policy, competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation, multi-level governance, report, sustainable development

ISSN 1831-9424 

Territoriality and multi-level governance 
of missions 

Exploring the role of local and regional actors in mission-oriented 
innovation and industrial policies 

Griniece, E., Reid, A., Miedzinski, M. 

2025 

 EUR 40444 

This document is a publication by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge 
service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policymaking process. The contents of this 
publication do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission. Neither the European 
Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of this 
publication. For information on the methodology and quality underlying the data used in this publication for which the 
source is neither Eurostat nor other Commission services, users should contact the referenced source. The designations 
employed and the presentation of material on the maps do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the 
part of the European Union concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or 
concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. 

Contact information 
Name: Michal Miedzinski 
Email: michal.miedzinski@ec.europa.eu 

EU Science Hub 
https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu 

JRC143455 

EUR 40444 

PDF 

ISBN 978-92-68-31402-9   ISSN 1831-9424   doi:10.2760/2715342 

KJ-01-25-451-EN-N 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2025 

© European Union, 2025  

The reuse policy of the European Commission documents is implemented by the Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 
on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Unless otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised 
under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that 
reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated.  

For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the European Union permission must be sought directly from 
the copyright holders. 

How to cite this report: Griniece, E., Reid, A. and Miedzinski, M., Territoriality and multi-level governance of missions - Exploring the role of local 
and regional actors in mission-oriented innovation and industrial policies, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2025, 
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/2715342, JRC143455. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Contents 

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 

Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 

Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 

1.

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 

1.1.  Aims and objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 

1.2.  Methodological approach ................................................................................................................................................ 6 

2. Multi-level governance and verticality of missions .................................................................................................... 7 

2.1.  Multi-level governance, verticality and territoriality of missions ............................................................. 7 

2.2.  Local and regional participation in EU missions ................................................................................................ 7 

2.2.1.  Mapping the local and regional participation in EU missions ....................................................... 7 

2.2.2.  Challenges to local and regional participation in EU missions ................................................. 15 

2.3.  Local and regional actors in national mission-oriented policies............................................................ 17 

3. Lessons for place-based industrial missions .............................................................................................................. 19 

3.1.  The concept of transformative industrial mission ......................................................................................... 19 

3.2.  Framing an industrial mission for the automotive industry and sustainable mobility ............. 24 

3.3.  Lessons for transformative place-based industrial missions ................................................................. 27 

4. Conclusions and recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 29 

4.1.  Key findings ......................................................................................................................................................................... 29 

4.2.  Policy recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 30 

References ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 33 

List of boxes.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 

List of figures ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 37 

Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 38 

Annex 1. Thematic scope of MOIP: exploring missions through the SDG lens ......................................... 38 

Annex 2. SDGs addressed by established MOIP initiatives ................................................................................. 39 

Annex 3. Overview of the relevant MOIP initiatives ................................................................................................ 42 

Annex 4. Regions with automotive and mobility priorities in S3 2021-2027 .......................................... 47 

1 

Abstract  

This report explores the role of local and regional actors in mission-oriented innovation and 
industrial policies. It examines how current mission-oriented approaches engage regions, cities,  
and rural communities in mission design and implementation, and whether these policies have  
the potential to contribute to ‘competitive sustainability’ in the European Union (EU). The study 
finds that despite the development of vertical coordination structures, EU missions and many 
national mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) lack effective multi-level collaboration 
mechanisms resulting in limited regional and local ownership of missions. There is a need for  
a higher degree of involvement of territorial stakeholders in the design and implementation of 
missions. The study provides lessons for place-based industrial missions, using the example of  
the automotive industry and sustainable mobility. It argues that a socially concerned industrial 
mission for the automotive sector should address differing dimensions depending on the type of 
region, such as urban or rural areas. The report emphasises the need for enabling frameworks  
that allow regions and cities to co-shape missions, and for mechanisms of ongoing evaluation  
and learning to capture new ideas and channel them into MOIPs. 

2 

 
 
Acknowledgements 

We owe a debt of gratitude to experts and stakeholders who found time for an interview with us 
and actively contributed to the online seminar. We would like to especially thank Pirita Lindholm 
from ERRIN and speakers at the workshop: Phil McCann and Matthijs Janssen.  

We would like to express our warmest thanks to the JRC colleagues who provided feedback on the 
draft of the report. We would like to thank Johan Stierna, Ramojus Remeris and Dimitris Pontikakis. 
We are also grateful for all the comments received during the EuSPRI 2025 conference where the 
draft report was presented.  

Authors 

Griniece E., Reid A., Miedzinski M. 

3 

 
 
Executive summary 

The report provides a comprehensive analysis of the role of local and regional actors in mission-
oriented innovation and industrial policies. The study explores how current mission-oriented 
approaches engage regions, cities, and rural communities in mission design and implementation, 
and whether these policies have the potential to contribute to "competitive sustainability" in the 
European Union (EU). The report focuses on the governance mechanisms for bottom-up initiatives 
and the reconciliation of top-down and bottom-up dynamics in mission design and implementation. 

The scope of the report includes an examination of the EU missions' governance structure, the 
involvement of local and regional authorities in mission design and implementation, and the impact 
of missions on regional development. The study analysed the funding patterns of EU missions and 
their territorial concentration, as well as the role of different types of organisations in mission 
implementation.  

The study emphasises the need for a more nuanced understanding of the role of local and regional 
actors in mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) and provides recommendations for improving 
the effectiveness of these policies in driving sustainable growth and development in the EU. By 
addressing the challenges and barriers to effective mission implementation, and by providing 
opportunities for regional and local actors to take an active role in mission design and 
implementation, the EU can ensure that its MOIPs have a positive impact on regional development 
and competitiveness. 

The new generation of mission-oriented approaches is relatively novel, frequently not fully 
understood and interpreted differently by various stakeholders. Policy makers have an opportunity 
to enhance their design and implementation. The study puts forward several policy messages on 
how to better embed missions in regional and local innovation and industrial strategies and 
policies: 

- 

- 

The design of missions should recognise that missions addressing different societal challenges 
will have different geographies of action and impacts.  

To inspire greater local engagement and collaboration, missions need to be co-designed with 
stakeholders from across governance levels, including regional and local actors. 

-  Mission-oriented innovation policies should allow different regions and cities flexibility to tailor 

missions to their specific localised challenges, needs and priorities.  

-  Multi-level governance of missions needs to be based on the subsidiarity principle. Enabling a 
more effective multi-level governance of missions will require mechanisms that facilitate 
challenge-oriented vertical collaboration, coordination, and learning between different levels of 
governance, as well as between governmental and non-governmental stakeholders.  

-  Mission instrument mixes and project portfolios need to be designed and orchestrated with the 

engagement of all governance levels.  

-  Missions need mechanisms of ongoing evaluation and learning to improve their effectiveness 

and inspire new projects and partnerships. 

-  Missions focused on industrial challenges also need a place-based approach and multi-level 
design. They should be tailored to the specific needs and priorities of different regions and 
cities, and that they should involve a range of stakeholders, including government, business, 
and civil society.  

4 

 
 
1.  Introduction 

1.1.  Aims and objectives 

The European Union’s (EU) innovation policy embraced a mission-oriented approach from the start 
of the Horizon Europe programme (2021-2027). This policy approach is designed to capture 
synergies across policy areas and funding programmes where innovation is a driver for change. 
Under Horizon Europe, five EU missions are up running, and the mission-oriented policy has 
influenced and inspired actors at national and regional level.  

Mission-oriented innovation policy (MOIP) is an approach explicitly aiming to foster transformative 
innovation. It is one of several possible policy responses addressing deep transformations in 
industry and society. We are living in a transformative era, where business as usual is no longer 
possible. Over the last decades, we have witnessed the power of transformation of digital 
technologies, which pushes for decentralised connectivity, a platform economy based on data 
management and artificial intelligence (AI). Moreover, there is a related deep transformation of the 
energy system, gradually moving from the fossil-oil paradigm to a decentralised ‘intelligent’ energy 
system based increasingly on renewables. 

The deep transformations affect established industries and their competitiveness. In the EU, a large 
part of the industrial system consists of medium-tech, energy-intensive industries, such as the 
chemical, steel or automotive industries. The new paradigm of the twin green and digital transition 
forces these industries to change to remain competitive. For instance, the EU automotive industry 
faces the double challenge of digitalisation and electrification, in a context of international 
competition where China is leapfrogging into the production of electrical vehicles.  

To tackle the global challenges, EU has responded with the European Green Deal and the EU Digital 
Agenda. Over the last four years, the EU has mobilised unprecedented financing instruments, 
regulatory packages, reforms, and trade policies in the direction of the twin green and digital 
transitions. The challenge now is how to implement policy in a way that combines the three 
dimensions of sustainability - social, environmental and economic sustainability - across sectors 
and geography.  

Achieving the objectives of the Green Deal and the Digital agenda depends critically on the 
mobilisation and buy-in of all stakeholders and territories, including rural and peripheral regions 
and localities. This report provides a critical analysis structured in two inter-related topics: 

1.  How does the current mission-oriented approach engage regions, cities and rural communities 
in mission design and implementation? This includes an analysis of the extent to which the 
current design of mission-oriented initiatives considers territorial impacts. The report reviews 
the governance mechanisms for bottom-up initiatives and for reconciling top-down and 
bottom-up dynamics in mission design and implementation, with the focus on engagement of 
regions, cities and communities in the mission design and implementation. 

2.  Whether the current mission-oriented innovation policies have the potential to contribute to 
‘competitive sustainability’, with a focus on the competitiveness of EU firms in the deep 
transition to the green and digital economy? This reflection is focused on the potential role of 
mission-oriented approaches for transforming the EU’s automotive industry. 

5 

 
 
1.2.  Methodological approach  

The methodological approach is based on data analysis drawing on available datasets and a review 
of academic literature, relevant policy papers, studies and programme documents of dedicated 
MOIP initiatives at national level. The analysis is complemented by a range of short case studies on 
specific aspects of the main research questions. Cases cover only those MOIP initiatives and 
developments that have been sufficiently described and analysed in the existing literature. No 
primary data collection has been undertaken in the scope of this assignment; hence the analysis is 
based only on the review or a new combination of secondary data sources. 

Targeted search queries were conducted in Overton.io. Overton is a database with more than 13 
million policy-related publications that uses machine-learning algorithms to index policy studies, 
technical reports, working papers, policy guidelines and legal documents in all languages worldwide. 
The sheer scope and coverage of the Overton.io database enables a broad view on the ‘policy buzz’ 
around mission-oriented innovation policy approaches and initiatives worldwide. 

The study includes a cross-analysis of the structured information on national MOIP initiatives 
worldwide included in the EC-OECD STIP Compass , which is an international database on science, 
technology and innovation (STI) policies. The coverage of the MOIP initiatives in this database 
comprises national missions in the EU countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the 
Netherlands, Sweden); Horizon Europe associated countries (Norway, United Kingdom) and third 
countries (Australia, Canada, Japan), as well as transnational missions at the EU level. 

To scope the geography of seed funding allocations of EU missions, the study team analysed 
funding data included in Horizon Dashboard – a database of EU research and innovation funding 
data. The data was analysed at NUTS3 level generating a comprehensive overview of the spread of 
Horizon Europe mission funding at sub-national level (as of August 2024).  

The study team also made use of the results from a survey of EU missions’ stakeholders that was 
implemented as a part of the first assessment of the EU missions’ progress in 2023. While the 
missions assessment reported on the survey mainly in terms of the overall results and insights per 
each of the five EU missions, this study looked more closely at the answers from various types of 
respondents and analysed more in detail answers related to multi-level governance of the EU 
missions and aspects of their vertical coordination.  

In addition to the international databases, survey data, and the review of academic and grey 
literature, the study also builds on relevant insights published or aggregated by key professional 
networks, projects and initiatives that work on mission-oriented innovation policy. These include 
among others such organisations as the UCL Institute of Innovation and Public Purpose (IIPP), 
Utrecht University Mission-oriented Innovation Policy Observatory, the OECD Mission Action lab and 
Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI), the European Commission Mission Unit, relevant 
units of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) and dedicated projects/initiatives that convene 
stakeholders driving mission implementation in practice, most notably, Horizon Europe funded 
project TRAMI  and the Policy Support Facility (PSF) Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on EU missions 
implementation at national level.  

Study findings were presented and discussed at an online expert workshop held on 7 October 2024. 
Feedback from these interactions has been taken up in the final version of this report. 

6 

 
 
2.  Multi-level governance and verticality of missions 

2.1.  Multi-level governance, verticality and territoriality of missions 

Multi-level governance (MLG) refers to the distribution of decision-making authority and 
responsibility between multiple levels and types of governmental, quasi-governmental, and non-
governmental groups (Hooghe and Marks, 2003). MLG concept is particularly relevant for the 
implementation of MOIPs as missions are a coordination device of design and implementation of 
policymaking for transformative change with various interfaces between EU, nation, regional and 
local levels. Regional and local policy makers not only hold key policy responsibilities and levers but 
also are in closer proximity to stakeholders and citizens who are affected by and hold relevant 
knowledge of concrete societal challenges at a local level. In a sense challenge driven mission-
oriented policy and sustainable regional development go hand in hand aiming to foster resilient 
and future-proof regional societies and economies. 

Studies on MOIP implementation suggest there is no a one-size-fits-all approach to mission 
governance. Emerging evidence on the governance of MOIPs, including EU missions, have 
pinpointed several critical challenges. A well-functioning governance structure for the 
implementation of missions must have high-level legitimacy, vision and leadership to drive 
transformative efforts. It must address collaboration and coordination among a variety of actors at 
different governance levels (vertical coherence) and have sufficient flexibility and adaptability to 
better respond to dynamic and evolving policy environments over time. Moreover, mission 
governance must ensure inclusion and active participation of diverse stakeholders, including place-
based actors, in the governance process to ensure broad-based support and diverse expertise 
(European Commission, 2024b). 

The translation of transnationally or nationally defined missions to local contexts (cross-level 
translation) raises the question of the ‘cognitive operationalisation’ (i.e. shared understanding of 
the mission’s meaning) versus local articulations (mission priorities for a city/region) (Wanzenböck 
and Frenken, 2020; Uyarra et. al., 2023). Moreover, bringing together locally generated solutions to 
address nationally or transnationally defined challenges is an underexplored area in transformative 
innovation policy due to potentially highly contextualised features of local solutions. Hence, more 
theoretical and empirical contributions are essential to examine the modalities around the 
‘verticality’ aspects of mission design and implementation. 

2.2.  Local and regional participation in EU missions 

2.2.1.  Mapping the local and regional participation in EU missions 

This section presents evidence on the extent to which current mission-oriented approaches engage 
regions, cities and rural communities in EU missions design and implementation. The analysis 
builds on data on the regional engagement in the Horizon Europe mission calls, a survey of regional 
and local actors implemented as part of the first EU missions assessment exercise carried out in 
2023 (European Commission, 2023) and data on the signatures to the EU mission charters.  

The implementation success of the EU missions in the upcoming years depends on the dedication 
of national and local authorities and stakeholders. Yet the EU missions lack co-ownership in many 
Member States and regions (European Commission, 2023, 2024a; TRAMI, 2024b). EU missions 
need to resonate with local, regional and national missions (TRAMI, 2024b). 

7 

 
 
An analysis of the Horizon Europe (HE) dashboard data on the involvement of regions at NUTS3 
level provides an insight into the territorial patterns of mobilisation across the five EU missions. 
While the overall number (571 NUTS3 regions) and distribution of the participating regions (see 
Figure 1) points to a well dispersed territorial participation, there are areas that are not involved 
including significant numbers of German, French and Polish NUTS3 regions. In the case of Germany, 
the NUTS3 level (Kreis) are relatively small and the distribution appears to be linked to whether the 
‘kreis’ host a major city. In contrast, from the map, Spain, Portugal and Finland appear to be well-
covered but this is a visual effect due to the relatively larger geographic areas of their NUTS3 
regions. 

The analysis finds that out of 571 participating regions to the HE mission calls, the top 20 NUTS3 
regions account for 41.7% of the total net EU contribution awarded up to mid-2024. The top 20 
regions include, principally, the major European metropolitan: Amsterdam, Brussels, Barcelona, 
Paris, Athens, Madrid, Helsinki, Rome and Dublin, Milano, Wien, Berlin, München (Kreisfreie Stadt), 
Veluwe (in the Netherlands, home to ‘Wageningen University and Research’), Cyprus, Stockholm, 
Bucharest, Porto and Thessaloniki. While this may be due in part to a ‘headquarters effect’ (i.e. 
some organisations are registered in a capital or major city but a subsidiary in another region may 
execute the project), the funding distribution is skewed towards metropolitan areas that host major 
businesses, universities and research organisations, public authorities, etc. 

In comparison, the top 20 NUTS3 regions for Horizon Europe (as of August 2024) in terms of net 
EU contribution, account for 36.9% of funding. Hence, the EU missions funding is relatively more 
territorially concentrated than for Horizon Europe as a whole. While the same NUTS3 regions are in 
the overall Horizon Europe top 20 for funding as in the top 20 for missions funding, there are a few 
differences (e.g. the Belgian cities of Leuven and Gent are in the Horizon Europe top 20 along with 
Lisbon and Copenhagen, while Cyprus, Porto, Thessaloniki and Bucharest rank lower). This may 
indicate that missions calls are more relevant for these ‘second tier’ regions.  

8 

 
 
Figure 1: Horizon Europe mission funding by NUTS3 region 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024 

The maps on the following pages present the geographical spread of Horizon Europe mission 
funding for each mission plus one additional map with the funding allocated to coordination (e.g. 
the TRAMI project), national contact points and the New European Bauhaus projects. Some 
relatively logical differences in territorial coverage can be observed, for instance, the Ocean and 
Waters Mission has a broader coverage in the Black Sea coastal regions, the Nordic region and 
Ireland. The Climate Adaptation and the Soil missions have noticeably generated interest in the 
Iberian Peninsula and Mediterranean regions. 

9 

Figure 2: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Cancer Mission 

Figure 3: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Cities Mission 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 4: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Climate Mission 

Figure 5: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUT3 region for Ocean and Water Mission 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 6: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Soil Mission 

Figure 7: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUT3 region for mission 
coordination and New European Bauhaus facility 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 8: Key figures on territorial coverage of EU missions 

EU Mission  No of 

participating 
NUTS3 region 

Total net EU 
contribution 

Average 
funding per 
region (€) 

Concentration in top 3 regions 

Cancer 

Cities 

Climate 
Adaptation 

Ocean and 
Waters 

Soil 

200 

188 

290 

294 

266 

€370m 

1,842,884  22.6% - Brussels, Barcelona, Paris 

€398m 

2,087,373  30.9% - Amsterdam, Brussels, Dublin 

€375m 

1,293,410  17.9% - Amsterdam, Barcelona, Helsinki 

€361m 

1,204,632  8.7% Barcelona, Berlin, Helsinki 

€273m 

1,028,881  13.6% Paris, Veluwe, Barcelona 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024 

For two of the missions, Cancer and Cities, the distribution is are more concentrated both in 
terms of the number of participating regions and the share of funding allocated to the 
top 3 regions. The top 3 regions in terms of funding account for the lowest share in Ocean and 
Waters; while Climate Adaptation and Soil lie in between. The concentration or dispersion of funding 
(also reflected in the average funding per region) reflects the different MOIP strategies adopted, for 
Cancer Mission the predominant role of specialist cancer research (located in major European health 
hubs) explains the concentration; while for the Cities Mission the decision to focus funding on a 
limited number of selected cities reflects also the capacity of the mission governance structures to 
deliver support to the cities in developing their plans. The three other missions have engaged with a 
larger number of regions through different mechanisms (as discussed below). This has led to 
relatively lower funding per region, raising the issue of critical mass. 

The share of funding by type of organisation points to significant differences in the way 
the missions have been designed (framed) and implemented. First of all, considering the 
breakdown of the total EU mission funding (as of mid-2024) by type of organisation compared to 
the breakdown for Horizon Europe as a whole, there is a noticeable reduction in the share of 
the higher education sector (35.3% for Horizon Europe as a whole compared to 24.7% for the 
EU missions calls) and of the private sector (28.3% compared to 23.6%). On the other hand, other 
organisations share of EU missions funding (at 10.7%) is 7.4% higher than for Horizon Europe as 
a whole. Similarly, the public sector plays a more significant role in the mission projects 
(3.9% in all Horizon Europe versus 10.7% for the EU missions’ projects). 

Considering the penetration of types of actors by mission the Cancer Mission is clearly closer to a 
more traditional ‘moonshot’ mission with a strong dominance of research centres followed by 
higher education; the Ocean Mission has a similar distribution of funding by type of actors. In 
contrast, the higher education sector leads for the Soil Mission followed by research organisations. 
The role of the public sector in these three missions is lower than the average for all five EU 
missions (11.3%). In contrast, the public sector absorbs a larger share of funding for the Cities and 
Climate Adaption Missions underlining the more important role of local/city and regional 
authorities in these two missions. Only in the case of the Cities Mission does the private sector 
(with 40% of funding) play a dominant role. The Climate Adaptation Mission has the most even 
spread of funding across the categories of organisations, suggesting that the mission has been able 
to mobilise through the Horizon Europe calls a ‘quintuple’ helix of actors. 

13 

 
Figure 9: Distribution of funding by organisation type by mission 

Source: Horizon Europe Dashboard, analysis by authors, data extracted 2 August 2024; Nb: HES stands 
for Higher or Secondary Education Establishments, OTH for Other (such as non-profit organisations), 
PRC for Private for-profit entities, PUB for Public bodies, and REC for Research Organisations 

Of the €186m funding allocated to public sector organisations, the top 10 public organisations (out 
of 500) account for some €37m (or 19.9% of the total), with local and regional authorities such as 
Dresden, Munich, Toscana, Copenhagen, South Denmark, Stockholm and Rotterdam recipients of 
significant funding (between €2.5m and €6m). A wide range of other cities and municipalities are 
involved but receive relatively limited funding (on average €438k). Other public organisations 
funded include water management and sea and ocean bodies (Baltic Sea, Canary Islands).   

In the ‘other’ category, which accounts for €234m of funding, there are several European level 
bodies (explaining in part Brussels-Capital region’s share) such as Eurocities, European Regions 
Research and Innovation Network (ERRIN), European Network of Living Labs. The BwB Investment 
Bank, located in Dublin, is the lead recipient (€15m) in the others category and is involved in 
projects for the Cities and Climates missions.  Another major player is ICLEI (based in Freiburg) a 
network of local government for sustainability (€13m) The top 10 organisations (out of 537) in the 
others category account for €62m of funding or 26.5% of the total. On average, the other 
organisations have been awarded €479k. 

The data on funding backs up other evidence on the involvement of local and regional 
authorities in the EU missions. All EU missions have developed mechanisms for ensuring vertical 
governance and coordination with the national, regional and local levels. The missions’ actions to 

14 

 
 
 
mobilise stakeholders (e.g. call for signatories to mission charters, annual mission forums and fairs, 
etc.) have borne fruit, underlining the significant ‘societal’ interest in the areas addressed (European 
Commission, 2023).  

A total of 311 regional and local authorities from 25 EU Member States had signed the Mission 
Charter for the EU Mission for Adaptation to Climate Change1. Around 362 eligible applications from 
cities from all EU Member States as well as nine associated countries and countries negotiating 
association submitted an expression of interest to join the EU Mission on Climate-Neutral and 
Smart Cities. Of these 112 cities were invited to develop Climate City Contracts, which include an 
overall plan to achieve climate neutrality by 2030. The Mission Soil manifesto has been signed, two 
months after its launch in April 2023, by more than 1400 signatories. Also the Mission Ocean and 
Waters charter2 attracted an increasing number of signatories with over 300 accepted actions 
representing a total budget of €3.2 billion (European Commission, 2023). However, the regional 
involvement in the Ocean and Waters and Soil missions was generally judged as less well 
established (TRAMI, 2023). For example, the Ocean and Waters Mission dashboard includes only 86 
mission charter actions from regional authorities, cities or local authorities from the total of 5503. 
The Cancer Mission is the only mission not to aim at direct mobilisation of sub-national 
organisations preferring to work through national ‘cancer mission hubs’ (NCMH)4. 

2.2.2.  Challenges to local and regional participation in EU missions 

While the EU missions have adopted a bottom-up approach in implementing the missions, via 
structured interactions with regions, city and local representatives, there remains insufficient 
coordination between national, regional, and local levels of governance. This was indicated 
as a limiting factor by 43% of the survey respondents5 and ranked as the highest limiting factor for 
each mission. Around 11% of all survey participants represented also regional or local government 
institutions from. Most of these regional and local respondents were engaged in the implementation 
of Climate Mission and Cities Mission. This target group highlighted that top three key elements that 
should help the mission to create value added is effective coordination between EU, national, 
regional and local levels, coherence between available funding and mission objectives and a strong 
commitment by different stakeholders. Among the key barriers to effective mission governance 
regional and local respondents ranked challenges in aligning resources across different governance 
levels, divergence of interests of different governance bodies and the lack of clarity of the 
cooperation structures between the mission governance bodies.  

Examining academic contributions regarding the vertical coherence of MOIPs, scholars contend that 
the role of regional and local level needs to be better defined in the mission-oriented approach, 
both at the design and the implementation stages (Cappellano and Kurowska-Pysz, 2020; 
Wanzenböck and Frenken, 2020). Some stress more strongly that “spatial and scalar dimensions of 
transformative missions have been neglected” (Uyarra, et.al, 2024). The danger is that a top-down 

1 https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/mission/the-mission/regions-and-local-authorities city 
2 See: https://maritime-forum.ec.europa.eu/en/frontpage/165047 
3https://maritime-forum.ec.europa.eu/theme/research/mission-ocean-and-

waters_en?fbclid=IwAR1S1Lf7gvM1Fe8WruEB2ecS0wVPy7_8XkY8difWG8ZyjwHE-b8LbKpg4DE  

4 See: https://www.cancermissionhubs.eu/ The ECHoS project funded under Horizon Europe is supporting the development 
of the NCMH with hubs pre-existing in several countries such as Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. 
5 Survey of mission stakeholders carried out in the scope of the first EU missions assessment in 2023 received a total of 

342 replies.  

15 

 
 
 
approach can ignore the local policy dynamics and areas of expertise (Bours et al., 2021; Bugge et 
al., 2022) leading to the risk of missions being turned into place-blind policies that might even 
strengthen territorial imbalances across and within the EU regions (Cappellano, et.al., 2023). 

While comprehensive accounts of how EU missions are recognised in regional strategies, policies 
and projects are still lacking, recent policy reports and interactions at various mission-related events 
and practitioner networks point towards several approaches how regional and local level responds 
to the novelty of EU missions as a transnational coordination device among the pool of more 
traditional R&I support instruments. 

ERRIN, a Brussels-based platform gathering around 120 regional organisations from more than 20 
European countries, highlight that regional priorities can correspond to the mission’s objectives on a 
topical level, but often they have not been integrated on an operational level, into the strategies 
and policies (ERRIN, 2024). Administrations are often working on initiatives related to the missions 
(e.g. climate adaptation in general) but might not realise the links with the EU level missions (TRAMI, 
2023). In some regions (e.g. Blekinge in Sweden, Czechia, Catalonia, Wallonia), missions have been 
integrated into the regional innovation strategies (RIS3) and the regional funding programmes, 
creating a structure for the missions on the regional level (TRAMI, 2024a; Reid et.al, 2023). It has 
also been highlighted that many regions use missions as a framework to mobilise key stakeholders 
for regional action plans and create visibility (TRAMI, 2023). 

There are many opportunities for adopting mission-oriented approach at regional level. Mission 
framework incentivises the definition of long-term targets, providing direction, structure, and shared 
goals. It is an opportunity to become strategic about the goals and implement an approach that is 
not captured by any single instrument (ERRIN, 2024). At the local level EU missions in many cases 
are joined (e.g. interrelated cities, climate, soil, waters topics), so local strategy may turn out to be 
cross-mission. Place-based approach can lead to genuinely shared ownership and more effective 
implementation of the missions’ purpose-oriented strategy. Stakeholder exchanges within the 
Horizon Europe funded project TRAMI indicated that EU missions are also seen as an opportunity for 
improved governance accelerating regional strategies, policy making, and the connection to 
European policy. EU missions also have the potential to promote regions internationally, which 
increases visibility and connects with new stakeholders. Lastly, it is an opportunity for regional and 
local stakeholder to discover and develop new methods and frameworks for innovation, as well as 
boost and motivate local innovation ecosystems to address regional issues (TRAMI, 2023). 

Among the barriers for the integration of regional and local level in the EU missions, the literature 
suggests that this new approach is not yet fully understood by stakeholders and the concept is also 
interpreted very differently by different stakeholders. Moreover, there is also a perceived lack of 
access to information from the EU level (European Commission, 2023). Moreover, existing policies 
and regulations can be obstacles for adopting mission-oriented at local level along with a 
reluctance among regional and local stakeholders to adopt new approaches and innovative ideas 
(TRAMI, 2023). Some regions report a tension between missions and smart specialisation (S3), as 
the first focus on a common European agenda and the latter on specific regional strengths. 
“Operationally, complementarities and synergies between EU Missions and S3 have not been 
formalized (…) The alignment of the two policies is mainly in the hands of regional and local policy 
makers and depends on their willingness to take extra steps beyond formal conditionalities of the 
S3” (European Commission, 2024a). 

16 

 
2.3.  Local and regional actors in national mission-oriented policies 

To examine the extent to which local and regional actors are engaged in national mission-oriented 
initiatives, the study team analysed aspects of vertical coordination for a plethora of national 
MOIPs included in the EC-OECD STIP Compass database, information provided by the participating 
countries to the EC Policy Support Facility (PSF) Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on EU missions 
implementation at national level as well as findings from recent mission-related reports and 
comparative studies. 

The review of the national examples on how mission-oriented initiatives are anchored regionally 
and locally in practice, revealed that clear vertical coordination mechanisms of national 
MOIPs are very sporadic. This indicates that territorial considerations in mission design and 
implementation are currently underdeveloped. Vertical coordination mechanisms range from formal 
steering groups to emergent, bottom-up processes; yet effective vertical coordination was 
noted by some MLE participating countries as a persistent challenge (European Commission, 
2024b).  

Among the more formal approaches to vertical coordination of missions are inter-institutional 
coordination groups. For example, in the implementation of Austrian initiative Mobility of the 
Future “vertical coordination takes place in some cases with the federal states, e.g. in the form of 
memorandums of understanding or when cooperating in the financing of innovation labs, a new 
instrument similar to living labs, which usually are co-financed by a ministry, federal states and 
cities” (EC-OECD STIP Compass). Moreover, Austria has started discussions between national and 
regional partners through platforms such as the Austrian Conference on Spatial Planning (European 
Commission, 2024b). Also Portugal utilises an Inter-ministerial Coordination Group involving 
multiple ministries and regional authorities engaged in mission implementation (European 
Commission, 2024b). 

In Finland, Sweden and Ireland the vertical coordination of MOIPs is done more informally 
and/or in a bottom-up emergent manner (European Commission, 2024b). “In Finland, the 
innovation policy itself is place-less, but its implementation favours regions with robust universities 
and strong companies. Local actors often adapt and influence overall policies through 
reinterpretation and localised funding” (Giacometti and Jessen, 2024). Swedish Challenge Driven 
Innovation Initiative and Strategic Innovation Programmes (SIPs) foresee that different 
organisations at different levels of government need to be involved in the governance of mission 
projects. This provides ample opportunities to regions, municipalities, county, neighbourhoods and 
individual citizens to provide input in, for examples, sustainable urban development projects (EC-
OECD STIP Compass).  Yet “while a general direction is articulated, the link between the national 
challenge- or mission-oriented programmes (SIPs and Impact Innovation) and the regional 
development approaches is rather weak at the instrument level” (Giacometti and Jessen, 2024). 
While there are some signs that this trend is shifting particularly through more territorially anchored 
community engagement “it remains to be seen to what extent the recent ‘rediscovery’ of the 
importance of context and place in national [mission-oriented] approaches will lead to a 
strengthening of multi-level governance” (Giacometti and Jessen, 2024). 

More emphasis on vertical coordination of missions is also achieved through dedicated alignment 
with regional or national smart specialisation strategies (S3). For example, Czechia’s 
national S3 strategy ensures resources from regional levels support priority areas (Reid, et. al., 
2023). The Dutch Top Sector Policy over the course of its implementation has “increasingly 
acknowledged the importance of an improved integration of sub-national actors and dialogue with 

17 

 
the central government” (EC-OECT STIP Compass). Regional actors have committed to the ambition 
to implement the Top Sector Agendas (IKIAs) and “the aim is to make the IKIAs and the coming 
Regional Innovation Strategies as 'complementary and synergistic as possible'” (EC-OECT STIP 
Compass) indicating the intention to link up regional specialisations and mission-oriented innovation 
challenges. A similar intention to align S3 and MOIP approaches have been mentioned by Slovakian 
participants to the PSF MLE (European Commission, 2024b), as well as tested in Catalonia and 
Wallonia (Reid et al., 2023). 

In sum, only a handful of European countries have established dedicated coordination mechanisms 
for their mission-oriented approaches. Verticality of national missions is currently envisioned either 
through formal coordination groups, more informal bottom-up approaches or by aligning missions 
with RIS3 design processes and implementation structures. It also should be noted that “there tend 
to be considerable differences between the system as it appears in its formal structures (top-down), 
and the reality of how it works, and how actors at multiple levels are involved in designing 
innovation activities” (Giacometti and Jessen, 2024). This calls for more in-depth research efforts to 
re-interpret and localise the full implications of mission-oriented initiatives. 

18 

3. Lessons for place-based industrial missions

This section provides an illustrative case on the potential role of mission-oriented approaches for 
transforming automotive industry in the EU. The section provides a critical reflection on whether the 
current mission-oriented policies have the potential to contribute to the ‘sustainable 
competitiveness’ called for by the ‘Draghi Report’ through what can be termed ‘industrial missions’. 
In line with the previous section, the multi-level or differentiated territorial contributions to such an 
‘industrial mission’ are discussed. 

3.1.  The concept of transformative industrial mission 

The concept of an ‘industrial mission’ is in line with the literature on mission-oriented innovation 
policy. The literature explicitly argues for a mission-oriented approach to industrial policy, 
emphasising the need to set ambitious goals to address societal challenges, fostering innovation, 
and driving economic growth towards specific objectives. This approach involves collaboration 
across sectors, strategic investments, and the involvement of various stakeholders in problem-
solving. The emphasis is on transformative missions to create public value and steer economic 
development; the importance of strategic investments, market-shaping policies, and cross-sector 
collaboration and the need for strong public sector capabilities, citizen engagement, and leadership. 
Compared to ‘traditional industrial policy’, the focus shifts from ‘supporting a sector’ towards 
addressing societal challenges, fostering innovation, and creating wider public and private value. 
The aim is to redesign economic systems through partnerships for inclusive and sustainable growth. 

Hence, “missions become the vertical aspect of new industrial strategy, replacing the sector or 
technology focus of traditional industrial strategy. This does not mean that governments no longer 
need to pay attention to sectors. Instead, missions shift the focus to transforming sectors, enabling 
them to contribute to mission goals” (Mazzucato et al, 2024). This approach has been applied to the 
case of Scotland as illustrated below. 

Figure 10: Illustrative mission roadmap for Scotland 

Source: Mazzucato & Macfarlane, 2024 

19 

The Draghi Report calls for the EU, as part of its decarbonisation strategy, to develop an “industrial 
action plan” for the automotive sector. According to Draghi, in the short term, the main objective 
should be to avoid a radical delocalisation of production away from the EU or the rapid takeover of 
EU plants and companies by state-subsidised foreign producers, while continuing decarbonisation. 
Looking forward, the report recommends the EU to “develop an industrial roadmap that accounts 
for the horizontal convergence (i.e. electrification, digitalisation and circularity) and the vertical 
convergence (i.e. critical raw materials, batteries, transport and charging infrastructure) of value 
chains in the automotive ecosystem”. In this proposal, while the focus remains ‘sectoral’, the cross-
sectoral (‘vertical convergence’) and societal goals (‘decarbonisation) elements are clear.  What is 
less clearly stated are the social dimensions, which are, however, significant, since the decline of 
automotive production in Europe places at risk 13.8 million jobs (directly or indirectly). The potential 
social unrest of large-scale job losses is already clear from the recent announcement of possible 
factory closures by the Volkswagen group in Germany, with the risk that it increases vote share for 
populist or extremist parties6. 

Flanagan et al. (2022) argue that “A socially concerned industrial policy would therefore have to 
engage more widely with society to understand the variety of societal problems, to engage in a 
process of problem definition, and to recognize the variety of responses to these problems 
potentially arising in different places. In a few cases place-specific responses to societal issues may 
revolve solely around the development of new technologies within specialized industrial clusters. 
More often local problem-solving strategies will involve searching for new ways of applying and 
embedding existing technologies, in line with local conditions and institutions – perhaps especially 
so for lagging regions”. 

In this vein, the Industry 5.0 concept proposed by the ESIR high-level group (European Commission, 
2021) and now adopted by the European Commission7 proposes to move from “a narrow and 
traditional focus on technology-or economic enabled growth of the existing extractive, production 
and consumption driven economic model to a more transformative view of growth that is focused 
on human progress and well-being based on reducing and shifting consumption to new forms of 
sustainable, circular and regenerative economic value creation and equitable prosperity”. 

As Renda et al. (2021) argue rather than representing a technological leap forward, Industry 5.0 
actually nests the Industry 4.0 approach in a broader context, providing purpose and directionality 
to the technological transformation of industrial production for people-planet-prosperity rather than 
simply value extraction to benefit shareholders. 

Therefore, a key question is the extent to which an industrial mission is designed to be different 
from ‘traditional’ industrial competitiveness policies. In the automotive field, an industrial mission 
would need to address the question of how Europe’s industrial competitiveness can be maintained 
(vis-à-vis global competitors, e.g. Chinese mass produced electric vehicles and related charging 
technologies/mobility services) while supporting the transformation of the automotive sector 
located in Europe (and its place in global value chains8) towards a more sustainable production 

6See:https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/volkswagen-warns-possible-plant-closures-germany-2024-

09-02/  

7See:https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/industrial-research-and-innovation/industry-50_en  
8 See chapter 7 Automotive business model transformation and the global value chain in Nindl, E., Confraria, H., 

Rentocchini, F., Napolitano, L., Georgakaki, A., Ince, E., Fako, P., Tuebke, A., Gavigan, J., Hernandez Guevara, H., Pinero 
Mira, P., Rueda Cantuche, J., Banacloche Sanchez, S., De Prato, G. and Calza, E., The 2023 EU Industrial R&D 

20 

 
 
 
process (‘circular economy’ contributing to avoiding strategic dependence on imported materials, 
decarbonisation of production and distribution processes, providing ‘quality jobs’, etc.). In this sense, 
in terms of maintaining production in Europe, the industrial mission would also address SDGs and 
hence can be seen as addressing societal challenges (e.g. by maintaining employment and value 
added in Europe while reducing the environmental impact of production)9. 

Figure 11: Differences between Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 

Industry 4.0  

Industry 5.0  

•  Centred around enhanced efficiency through 
digital connectivity and artificial intelligence  

•  Technology – centred around the emergence 

of cyber-physical objectives  

•  Aligned with optimisation of business models 
within existing capital market dynamics and 
economic models – i.e. ultimately directed at 
minimisation  of  costs  and  maximisation  of 
profit for shareholders 

•  No focus on design and performance dimen-
sions  essential  for  systemic  transformation 
and decoupling of resource and material use 
from  negative  environmental,  climate  and 
social  impacts  for  sustainability  and  resili-
ence 

•  Ensures a framework for industry that com-
bines competitiveness and sustainability, al-
lowing industry to realise its potential as one 
of the pillars of transformation  

•  Emphasises impact of alternative modes of 

(technology) governance  

•  Empowers workers through the use of digital 
devices,  endorsing  a  human-centric  ap-
proach to technology 

•  Builds transition pathways towards environ-
mentally sustainable uses of technology 

•  Expands the remit of corporation’s responsi-

bility to their whole value chains 

• 

Introduces indicators that show, for each in-
dustrial ecosystem, the progress achieved on 
the path to well-being, resilience and overall 
sustainability. 

Source: Renda et al., 2021 

Moreover, an industrial mission for the automotive sector would need to address changing patterns 
of mobility, notably in urban areas where the privately owned motor car is increasingly viewed as a 
non-optimal mode of transport. Cars not only provoke air quality health issues (and will continue to 
even if there is a mass shift to EV) but are an inefficient way of moving around urban areas. They 
encourage urban sprawl (with negative consequences for rural land use) and a ‘space absorber’ in 
urban areas that need to green public areas to adapt to the climate crisis (reducing urban hotspots, 
health benefits of green areas, improving urban biodiversity). This implies adapting vehicles to 
emerging markets driven by mobility as a service concept (e.g. car sharing) or to respond to 
measures to reduce the automotive space ‘footprint’ (e.g. Paris city increasing parking charges for 
SUV).   

Investment Scoreboard, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2023, doi:10.2760/506189, 
JRC135576. 

9 See for instance the KPIs in the Revised Work Plan of the Automotive Regions Alliance of the European Committee of the 

Regions. 

21 

 
 
 
Studies point to the fact that there is not a one size fits all solution for future sustainable mobility, 
with a move from mobility centred to accessibility centred systems10. Precursors for such an 
approach include Sweden’s Vision Zero plan, launched in 1997, a safe system approach where no 
one should be at risk of being fatally or severely injured while using road transport, which has been 
in place for some 25 years and combines various types of innovations, such as new cycling 
infrastructure or Mobility as a Service (MaaS) technologies to achieve the mission goals (Craens, et 
al, 2022). 

Figure 12: Urban mobility framework 

Source: European Commission, 2021, doi:10.2775/400992 

As Borgato et al (2021) underline the costs and benefits of the sustainable urban mobility transition 
have differing impact depending on the size of cities. In terms of CO2 reduction, the policy 
effectiveness analysis shows that Shared Mobility and Demand Management is the policy group 
that generates the highest impacts by 2030 and 2050. Still, some differences can be observed 
based on city dimensions policy groups affecting greenhouse gas emissions: in small cities, Pricing 
Schemes is preferrable over the other groups. In medium cities, Transport Infrastructure is the 
second-best policy measure to reduce CO2 emissions. Finally, in large cities, Traffic Management 
and Control is the second-best option.   

10 See OECD (2022), Redesigning Ireland’s Transport for Net Zero: Towards Systems that Work for People and the Planet, 

OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b798a4c1-en. 

22 

 
 
 
 
Figure 13: Costs and benefits of sustainable urban mobility transition 

Source: Borgato et al., 2021 

Moreover, most studies on urban mobility point to the reduction in the number of motor vehicles on 
the road as an outcome of any scenario. This needs to be considered when reflecting on the future 
needs of users and design of vehicles as well the scale of investment (private and public) in 
automotive production value chains.  

Figure 14: New mobility challenges for rural areas 

Source: ITF, 2021 

23 

 
 
In rural areas, dependence on car use tends to be higher and the costs or applicability of solutions 
such as public transport or MAAS are different. This requires alternative approaches that may be 
more community based or depend on higher per capita public investment (e.g. in long distance cycle 
paths connecting rural communities). 

The place-based dimension of a future EU industrial mission therefore needs to be integrated from 
the outset if differing needs are to be met and places are not to be left behind in the shift to 
sustainable mobility. 

3.2.  Framing an industrial mission for the automotive industry and 

sustainable mobility 

This section explores alternative paths to developing a mission-oriented innovation policy approach 
to ‘bottom-up’ local/regional missions and how they can connect to national/European missions, 
industrial (technology) roadmaps or strategies. A number of regions have a significant specialisation 
(or dependence on) the automotive sector and are regrouped at European level in initiatives such as 
the Automotive Regions Alliance (ARA)11, the Automotive Skills Alliance12 or participate to European 
level partnerships addressing topics such as connected and autonomous mobility or zero emission 
road transport13. 

We consulted the S3 COP observatory (see table in Annex 3) to identify regions addressing 
automotive or mobility through their S3 that have adopted alternative industrial transition 
pathways. Two regions are highlighted in the following boxes to illustrate differentiated approaches 
to developing territorial based missions in the automotive and future sustainable mobility fields.   

The first is Västra Götaland County which has given a priority to the topic Mobility of the Future 
within its Regional innovation strategy for 2022 – 203014. Another example of an automotive region 
that has been slower to adopt a transformative approach in the face of automotive sector changes 
is Eastern Slovakia, particularly around the Košice region. Faced by the declining fortunes of the 
automotive industry, the Košice self-governing region (KSK) council region adopted an S3 15 in June 
2021 with an aim to create a new high-tech industry in the region of eastern Slovakia focused on 
the fields of biomedicine, biotechnology, digital technologies, advanced materials and green 
technologies. 

11See: https://cor.europa.eu/en/our-work/cooperations-and-networks/automotive-regions-alliance 
12 See: https://automotive-skills-alliance.eu/ 
13See: https://www.2zeroemission.eu and  See: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-

opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/european-partnerships-horizon-europe/climate-
energy-and-mobility_en  

14 See: https://www.vgregion.se/regional-utveckling/omraden/innovation/  
15 See: https://web.vucke.sk/sk/kompetencie/regionalny-rozvoj/koncepcne-materialy/ris/  

24 

 
 
 
 
 
Box 1: Transformation of the automotive sector and future mobility: Gothenburg, Västra Götaland region 

The Västra Götaland region, and notably the capital Gothenburg, is at the forefront of efforts to 
transform the automotive sector and future mobility. This transformation focuses on sustainable 
transportation, electrification, digitalisation, and new mobility solutions. Some key efforts include: 

1. Electrification and Sustainable Vehicles 

Volvo Cars and Polestar, both headquartered in Gothenburg, are pivotal in driving the shift 
towards electric vehicles (EVs). Volvo aims for all-electric models by 2030 and focuses on 
sustainability through the entire production chain, including using recycled materials. 

Electric Buses: Gothenburg is home to ElectriCity, a collaborative project that runs fully electric 
buses, contributing to reduced emissions and noise pollution in urban areas. 

Collaborations for Battery Production: There is a significant emphasis on localising battery 
production to support EV manufacturing, with initiatives such as Northvolt, which is working to 
establish sustainable battery supply chains. 

2. Digitalisation and Autonomous Driving 

Zenseact, a Volvo-owned company, is heavily involved in developing autonomous driving 
software and safety technologies. Gothenburg is a key testbed for self-driving cars and 
connected vehicle infrastructure. The region has a robust tech ecosystem that supports 
innovations in AI, connected vehicles, and digital mobility platforms, with initiatives aiming to 
make driving smarter and more efficient. 

3. Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and New Mobility Solutions 

Gothenburg is developing integrated solutions that combine public transportation, bike-sharing, 
ride-hailing, and electric car rentals into single, user-friendly digital platforms. For example, 
Västtrafik, which offers integrated public transport solutions16 has been involved in the project 
"MaaS for Sustainable Cities", within Drive Sweden which has focused on activities in three areas: 
MaaS Framing, MaaS Sandpit and MaaS Node. The initiative has organised various events and 
activities to promote dialogue and innovation in public transport, MaaS and the collective 
mobility of the future. Urban Mobility Innovations: programmes like Drive Sweden17 aim to create 
sustainable, shared, and digital mobility solutions for urban environments. In 2024, Sweden's 
first mobility hotel opened in Gothenburg, a large-scale initiative combining micromobility and 
micrologistics. The mobility hotel in the large shopping centre, Nordstan, is designed to facilitate 
quiet and emission-free transportation of goods and people in the city centre. GoCiklo, which has 
developed its battery swapping concept within Drive Sweden, is part of this initiative. 

4. Collaborative Initiatives and Testbeds 

Lindholmen Science Park has contributed to transforming the disused shipyard area in 
Gothenburg into a knowledge environment where more than 20,000 people move every day. The 
park's focus is tomorrow's mobility for people and goods. AstaZero, located near Gothenburg, is a 
major testing facility for autonomous vehicles and connected traffic systems. It collaborates with 
automotive companies, startups, and universities to test future mobility technologies. 
MobilityXlab offers startups and emerging companies with pioneering ideas within mobility and 
connectivity the opportunity to accelerate with six partner companies: Magna, Polestar, Volvo 
Group, Zeekr Technology Europe and Zenseact. 

16 https://www.vasttrafik.se/en/about-vasttrafik/vasttrafik-ab/  
17 https://www.drivesweden.net  

25 

 
 
 
EU partnerships: The region actively participates in EU projects and collaborations, positioning 
itself as a leader in research on future mobility, electrification, and transport sustainability. 
These include EIT Urban Mobility, the European Partnership on Connected, Cooperative and 
Automated Driving (CCAM). 

5. Sustainability Focus 

Västra Götaland has a strong focus on reducing carbon emissions through transportation policies 
that promote EVs, renewable energy integration, and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. The 
Climate Smart City Challenge in Gothenburg aims to further reduce the environmental footprint 
of urban transportation. Through these combined efforts, Västra Götaland, with Gothenburg as a 
hub, is positioning itself as a key player in shaping the future of sustainable, electric, and 
autonomous mobility. 

Box 2: Strategic challenges of automotive sector: Košice, Slovakia 

Slovakia has been heavily dependent on traditional automotive manufacturing, with major 
companies like Volkswagen, Peugeot-Citroën (Stellantis), and Kia having large production plants 
in the country. However, the region around Košice and eastern Slovakia has not embraced the 
same level of transformation compared to regions in Western Europe. Key challenges include: 

1.  Dependence  on  Traditional  Manufacturing:  Slovakia  is  one  of  the  largest  car  producers  per 
capita in Europe, and the automotive sector has been central to its economy for years. How-
ever, this heavy reliance on conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle production 
means there has been a slower shift towards electric vehicle (EV) manufacturing and other 
mobility solutions, particularly in the less-developed eastern part of the country. 

2.  Limited Innovation and Electrification Initiatives: While there are some efforts in Western Slo-
vakia (Bratislava region) to adapt to electrification and innovation, the Košice region has not 
seen significant investment in EV production, battery technologies, or digital mobility services. 
Compared to regions like Baden-Württemberg in Germany or Västra Götaland in Sweden, the 
region lacks large-scale initiatives or public-private partnerships transforming the sector. 
Infrastructure and Talent Gap: Eastern Slovakia, and Košice in particular, faces challenges in 
infrastructure development and availability of a highly skilled workforce to drive innovations 
in electrification, autonomous driving, or digital mobility services. The focus until recently has 
been largely on attracting foreign direct investment for traditional car manufacturing rather 
than fostering local innovation ecosystems. 

3. 

4.  Slow Governmental Action on Policy Support: national policies in Slovakia have been slower to 
incentivise electric vehicle production, build up charging infrastructure, or encourage startups 
in the mobility sector. As a result, regions like Košice have lagged behind  more progressive 
areas in Europe that are pushing for a low-carbon, future-oriented transformation. 

In short, while Slovakia has a strong automotive sector, the Košice region is an example of an 
area that has not yet fully embraced the rapid transformation towards EVs, sustainability, and 
smart mobility solutions seen in other parts of Europe. Future opportunities appear to depend on 
an enhanced integration of digital technologies into the automotive industry (an example is the 
recent announcement of a new R&D centre of MinebeaMitsumi Inc. to develop electronic 
equipment products for the automotive market as well as robot products for the industrial 
equipment market18) and mobility solutions developed in the region as well as actions to 
diversify the economy.   

18 See: https://nmbtc.com/news/announcing-the-opening-of-minebeamitsumi-development-center-kosice/ 

26 

 
 
 
The IT industry in the region is seen as one element of the future growth potential with a 
relatively strong IT cluster (businesses and education and research) including initiatives such as 
the EDIH CASSOVIUM consortium which consists of three key institutions operating in eastern 
Slovakia: Technical University in Košice, University of Pavel Jozef Šafárik in Košice and Košice IT 
Valley. The EDIH is supported through public funding from the Digital Europe programme and the 
Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

As part of the S3 diversification strategy, a regional innovation centre (ICKK)19 was founded by 
the KSK, the City of Košice, the University of Pavel Jozef Šafárik, the Technical University of 
Košice and the University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy in Košice. The ICKK has the 
responsibility to implement the RIS3 and stimulate the further development of the innovation 
ecosystem. The focus is on talent development in secondary schools, provide special acceleration 
programmes for startups and help SMEs to improve their international business potential. In 
addition, ICKK works closely with international investors, which gives another opportunity to scale 
startups in the ecosystem. The network of partners, institutions and scientific organisations 
provides advantages that make cooperation between individual innovation actors more effective. 
The long-term ambition is to increase the regional innovation potential, reduce the number of 
people leaving the Košice region and support the regional innovation ecosystem. 

3.3.  Lessons for transformative place-based industrial missions 

The previous sections have provided a rapid review of the evidence for a future industrial mission in 
the automotive and sustainability mobility area. The diagram below provides a summary of the 
possible multi-level/place-based approach such a mission could adopt. 

Figure 15: Alternative territorial dimensions and framings for an automotive/mobility mission 

EU level automotive/mobility mission

• Maintain high value-added employment in the EU and 
avoid strategic dependency on foreign automotive 
suppliers/technologies
• Portfolio of industrial policy measures addressing changing 
mobility patterns and electrification of automotive sector

Urban sustainable mobility mission

• Foster a shift to sustainable mobility and reduce space 
allocated to cars to free up for greening cities
• Co-design of mobility solutions including vehicles adapted 
to urban environment - test-beds/living labs, etc.

Rural accessibility mission

• Ensure all people in rural areas can access services and 
connect in the most sustainable manner
• Co-design and experimentation of diverse solutions for 
innovative rural services

Source: Authors 

19 https://ickk.sk  

27 

 
 
 
 
A ‘socially concerned’ industrial mission for the automotive sector and sustainable 
mobility should address differing dimensions depending on the type of region. In urban 
areas, the private motor car is increasingly viewed as a non-optimal mode of transport that 
provokes air quality health issues (and will continue to even if there is a mass shift to EV). It is a 
mode of transport that encourages urban sprawl (with negative consequences for rural land use) 
and a ‘space absorber’ in urban areas that need to green public areas to adapt to the climate crisis 
(reducing urban hotspots, health benefits of green areas, improving urban biodiversity).  

This implies adapting vehicles to emerging markets driven by mobility as a service concept (e.g. car 
sharing) or to respond to measures to reduce the automotive space ‘footprint’ (e.g. Paris city 
increasing parking charges for SUV). The need for seamless shifting between modes of transport 
should also be considered. 

In rural areas, settlement patterns tend to be distributed in a highly dispersed manner. It is difficult 
to cost-effectively organise public transport services to cater to everyone’s needs. There is scope for 
identifying roads and greenway links that can support functional and recreational active travel 
within rural areas, and between these and other towns and larger cities in their functional areas. In 
(very) isolated rural areas, the demand for travel may be so low as to preclude the provision of 
even bus services. These needs may be more readily met by innovative means, such as demand 
responsive services, shared mobility or community car schemes. 

Therefore, vehicle design, EV network infrastructure, MAAS, etc. needs for rural areas versus urban 
areas are likely to be different. By designing a multi-level governance approach that includes place-
based experiments and aligns with regional transformation strategies for the automotive industry 
regions20, a future EU automotive/mobility missions could help this feed into the thinking of vehicle 
producers and other ecosystem innovators thereby informing industrial strategies. 

20 European Committee of the Regions: Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget, Hindriks, I., Hogetoorn, 
M., Rodrigues, M., Zani, R. et al., State of play and future challenges of automotive regions, European Committee of the 
Regions, 2024, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2863/897011  

28 

 
 
 
 
4.  Conclusions and recommendations

4.1.  Key findings 

The study explored ways in which the current mission-oriented innovation policies engage 
regions, cities and rural communities in mission design and implementation drawing on evidence on 
EU mis-sions and a sample of national and regional approaches. We also asked whether and to 
what extent the mission-oriented innovation policies have the potential to contribute to ‘competitive 
sustainability’ in context of the transition to the green and digital economy. 

As far as the first research question is concerned, our empirical analysis of the regional 
participation in the EU missions suggests the Horizon Europe mission funding is relatively more 
territorially con-centrated than for the programme as a whole. The urban-peri-urban-rural patterns 
of participation are similar, with the major metropolitan regions most effective in acquiring funds. 

The analysis points to the need for a more nuanced understanding of the role of local and regional 
actors in MOIPs. European regions, cities and local communities are expected to contribute to the 
EU missions by design through the formal vertical coordination structures or by focusing 
missions on place-based action, as in the case of EU Cities Mission. Many regions and cities are 
engaged in im-plementing  EU missions through  HE projects  and  are  signatories  to the  adopted 
mission  charters. However, despite some encouraging trends, the EU missions still lack sufficiently 
effective ways to engage regional and local actors on an operational level leading to the limited 
local awareness and co-ownership of missions. Certain national MOIP programmes address the 
multi-level governance of missions in several ways, including formal coordination groups, informal 
bottom-up approaches or by aligning missions with S3.  

There is a wider concern about the suitability of missions for regions, especially those with 
limited capabilities. Some observers argue missions may be appropriate mainly for regions with 
developed capacities to mobilise actors and resources, well-functioning networks and good public 
institutions (Interreg Europe, 2020; Tödtling et al., 2022). Other scholars caution that relying on 
regions to deliv-er on missions may be ineffective as their policy capabilities are either too generic 
or too fragment-ed to trigger the desired changes (Karo, 2018). These are valid concerns but we 
argue policy makers across governance levels have an opportunity to design mission-oriented 
policies taking into account both place-based opportunities and limitations. 

The concept of transformative industrial missions is rooted in MOIP, which seeks to drive economic 
development  by  addressing  societal  challenges  through  ambitious,  collaborative  strategies. 
Unlike traditional industrial policies that focus on sectoral support, industrial missions should 
prioritise trans-formation across sectors to achieve broader public value, sustainability, and 
economic resili-ence. Our review concluded that there is currently a strong focus in national and 
international mis-sion initia-tives on the interrelated green transition themes, including energy, 
transport, climate ac-tions, re-sponsible production and consumption. An emphasis can also be 
observed on health and well-being goals, while a focus on food, bioeconomy and water topics is 
noticeably less pronounced in the na-tional MOIP programmes. Challenges related to social fabric, 
e.g. poverty, quality education, inequal-ities, are currently not addressed by MOIPs in any 
mainstream manner (see Annex I and II).  

The case for an industrial mission in the mobility sector aligns with this transformative approach by 
helping regions face up to evolving mobility needs, electrification and digitalisation in both produc-
tion and use of mobility solutions and the integration of circular economy principles (ensuring 
recov-ery and reuse of materials) that helps foster open strategic autonomy and protect of 
European in-dustrial competitiveness. Such an industrial mission also needs address the risk of 
potential delocal-isation of production and rapidly changing skills needs through initiatives that 
integrate the social dimension alongside technological advancements if social unrest is to be 
avoided. 

29 

4.2.  Policy recommendations 

The new generation of mission-oriented approaches is relatively novel, frequently not fully 
under-stood and interpreted differently by various stakeholders. Policy makers have an opportunity 
to en-hance their design and implementation. In particular, what would it take to improve current 
mission approaches through deepening their territorial embedding?  

The design of missions should recognise that missions addressing different societal 
chal-lenges will have different geographies of action and impacts.  

Different nature of challenges addressed and different framings of missions result in different geo-
graphical outreach and different patterns of territorial action and impacts. Missions need to be 
based on a robust understanding of how they may affect regions and cities with different exposure, 
sensi-tivity and opportunities to benefit from tackling mission challenges. Therefore, their design 
should include an analysis of how alternative mission framings may affect territories with different 
socio-economic and institutional profiles, and they may differ in mobilising relevant actors for a 
collective action towards the mission goal.  

For example, alternative mission framing around accessibility, mobility or transport challenges may 
inspire contrastingly different projects and mobile stakeholders active in different value chains. Fur-
thermore, regional stakeholders underline the necessity of selecting appropriate societal 
challenge that can be effectively tackled at regional level. Focusing on small and agile 
demonstrator projects is conducive to successful uptake of missions while too broadly framed 
missions may fail in mobilising stakeholders to take action.  

To inspire greater local engagement and collaboration, missions need to be co-
designed with stakeholders from across governance levels, including regional and local 
actors. 

Regions and cities should have leading roles in localising global challenges and articulating bottom-
up dimensions of missions. EU mission design includes various mechanisms (e.g. ‘lighthouses’, 
‘hubs’, etc.) to promote experimentation and demonstration of solutions at local level, however the 
effec-tiveness of mission governance coordination remains a limiting factor (European Commission, 
2023). The mission governance should offer collaborative spaces and platforms where local actors 
and part-nerships can collectively frame and design place-based missions. This means a shift from 
a predom-inantly top-down approach to a more collaborative and participatory mode that involves 
regional and local stakeholders in the design and implementation of the EU and country-level 
missions. 

Mission-oriented innovation policies should allow different regions and cities flexibility 
to tailor missions to their specific localised challenges, needs and priorities.  

Flexible design could involve providing regions and cities with a range of policy options and 
instruments to achieve mission objectives, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. Such a 
challenge driven approach would make the policy fit for addressing diverse challenges and 
fostering place-based development pathways. It may be better suited to reinvigorate stakeholder 
engagement in economic development policies, such as EU Cohesion Policy, helping build 
partnerships around localised challenges (Molica et al., 2025). 

An example of place-based approach to missions is the ‘small wins strategy’ (Morrison et al., 2023) 
and ‘challenge-oriented RIS’ (Tödtling et al., 2022). The ‘small wins strategy’ also referred to as 
‘mini-missions’ is characterised by a focus on small-scale and bottom-up policy initiatives that are 
guided by a shared local agenda to address concrete societal challenges in contrast to the bold, 
ambitious and large-scale goals set out by mission-oriented approach. The idea of a small wins 
strategy gives regional and local policy makers an opportunity to engage in “a logic of stimulating 
distributed innovation efforts to foster gradual, yet in-depth change in a desired direction” (Bours et 
al., 2021). Small wins emphasise that small, concrete, and consecutive actions can accumulate and 

30 

reinforce themselves to lead to transformative changes. Examples include shared agendas 
developed, for instance, in the Catalan Smart Specialisation Strategy (RIS3CAT), city missions 
developed by many municipalities across Europe and Austrian efforts to mobilise universities as 
effective local ‘mission brokers’ (European Commission, 2024c). 

Multi-level governance of missions needs to be based on the subsidiarity principle. 

Enabling a more effective multi-level governance of missions will require mechanisms that 
facilitate challenge-oriented vertical collaboration, coordination, and learning between different 
levels of governance, as well as between governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. The 
subsidiarity principle should favour coalitions of actors from the governance levels and places 
where mission challenges can be most effectively and constructively addressed. The verticality of 
missions through the subsidiarity lens means an explicit place-based dimension of mission design 
and implementation that allows to localise mission flagship projects where they can deliver and 
where they are most needed, either contributing to EU-level or national challenges.  

Several arrangements to enhance vertical governance could include: 

− The establishment of multi-level mission coordination bodies, which could provide structures for
knowledge-sharing, coordination and decision-making between different levels of governance;

− The creation of regional and local mission hubs, which could serve as place-based mission

platforms or missions labs for collaboration and coordination between different stakeholders;

− The development of mission programmes (or place-based missions) tailored to the specific

needs and priorities of different regions and cities.

Mission instrument mixes and project portfolios need to be designed and orchestrated 
with the engagement of all governance levels.  

Depending on the challenge, instruments supporting missions can be deployed from different 
governance levels. Mission projects can mobilise partnerships of actors from various governance 
levels and be supported by different instruments. While lower levels of governance are better 
placed to co-design specific place-based mission strategies and projects, higher levels of 
governance may be better suited to build mission-related policy capacities, gather evidence and 
support policy peer learning, and help orchestrate projects and actors engaged in missions. It is key 
that mission-supporting instruments are not limited to funding projects but also create enabling 
environment in missions in which projects are co-produced, implemented and linked. This also 
implies new roles of public servants as in Catalonia or in Germany where federal policymakers 
played a key role in articulating missions in different contexts (Priebe and Herberg, 2024). 

Missions need mechanisms of ongoing evaluation and learning to improve their 
effectiveness and inspire new projects and partnerships. 

Policy learning could involve the creation of new institutions or mechanisms that can facilitate 
knowledge sharing and learning between different levels of government, as well as between 
government and non-government stakeholders. Various mission stakeholder and expert interactions 
have highlighted the need for continuous learning in-built in MOIPs and a dedicated fora for 
learning to create a sense of ‘collective ownership’ that is currently missing (TRAMI 2024b, ERRIN, 
2024). The call for enhanced communication channels linking national, regional and local entities, 
as well as the need for a meeting platform for all these different policy levels to meet has been 
echoed by many survey respondents and regional stakeholder networks (ERRIN, 2024). 

31 

Enhanced knowledge sharing and capacity building of regional actors for mission implementation 
has also been frequently referenced by survey respondents as an important aspect to improve EU 
mission implementation. Yet there are requirements for new types of capacities, including 
orchestration, strategic stakeholder mobilisation and citizen engagement. Missions require new 
ways of working within local authorities and stakeholders. They require deep change that brings 
constant practical challenges and demands tactical problem-solving (UCL IIPP, 2023a). 

Missions focused on industrial challenges also need a place-based approach and multi-
level design.  

Missions focused on industrial transition should be tailored to the specific needs and priorities of 
different regions and cities, and that they should involve a range of stakeholders, including 
government, business, and civil society.  

For instance, as examined in this study, framing an industrial mission for the automotive sector 
requires a place-based approach that takes account of regional strengths, mobility needs and 
challenges. Future mobility solutions should reflect diverse regional characteristics, balancing urban 
and rural needs while ensuring a just transition to sustainable mobility. Critically, European 
automotive design and mobility solutions should not be dictated by the mobility patterns present in 
and the industrial strategies adopted by China or the USA. The EU’s automotive sector has much to 
gain from drawing inspiration from and piloting solutions adapted to the distinctive and diverse 
needs of European cities and regions. Hence, this calls for enhanced coordination of European, 
national, and regional strategies by integrating place-based approaches into EU level industrial 
mission roadmaps. 

32 

References 

Borgato, S. Chirico, F., Fermi, F., Bosetti, S. (2021). Study on costs and benefits of the sustainable 
urban mobility transition – Final Report. EIT Urban Mobility, available at: 
https://www.eiturbanmobility.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Final-report_Long-version.pdf  

Bours, S.A., Wanzenböck, I., Frenken, K. (2021). Small wins for grand challenges: A bottom-up 
governance approach to innovation policy, available at: https://www.euspri2021.no/wp-
content/uploads/2021/06/Session-13.4.pdf 

Brown, R. (2021). Mission-oriented or mission adrift? A critical examination of mission-oriented 
innovation policies. European Planning Studies, 29(4), 739-761. 

Bugge, M.M., Andersen, A.D., Steen, M. (2022). The role of regional innovation systems in mission-
oriented innovation policy: Exploring the problem-solution space in electrification of maritime 
transport. European Planning Studies, 30 (11), 2312-2333. 

Cappellano, F., Kurowska-Pysz, J. (2020). The mission-oriented approach for (cross-border) regional 
development. Sustainability, 12(12), 5181. 

Cappellano, F., Makkonen, T., Dotti, N.F., Morisson, A., Rizzo, A. (2022). Where innovation meets 
directionality: An index to measure regional readiness to deal with societal challenges. European 
Planning Studies, 30 (8), 1549-1576. 

Cappellano, F., Molica, F., Makkonen, T. (2023). Missions and Cohesion Policy: Living separate or 
dancing together. JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis No 02/2023, European 
Commission, JRC133366. 

Coenen, L., Hansen, T., Rekers, J.V. (2015). Innovation policy for grand challenges: An economic 
geography perspective. Geography Compass, 9(9), 483-496. 

Craens, J., Frenken, K., Meelen, T. (2022). Chapter 15: Mission-oriented innovation policy: the case of 
the Swedish "Vision Zero" approach to traffic safety". In Innovations in Transport. Cheltenham, UK: 
Edward Elgar Publishing, available at: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800373372.00022  

Dylan, H., Morgan, K., Delbridge, R. (2024). Putting Missions in Their Place: Micro-Missions and the 
Role of Universities in Delivering Challenge-Led Innovation. Regional Studies 58, no. 1 (2024): 208–
19. DOI:10.1080/00343404.2023.2176840

ERRIN (2024) Interview with Pirita Lindholm, Director of ERRIN and Silvia Ghiretti, EU Missions Policy 
Officer at ERRIN.  

European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2021). Renda, A., Schwaag 
Serger, S., Tataj, D., Morlet, A. et al., Industry 5.0, a transformative vision for Europe – Governing 
systemic transformations towards a sustainable industry, Publications Office of the European Union, 
available at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/17322  

European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2023). Reid, A., Rantcheva, 
A., Krūminas, P., Study supporting the assessment of EU missions and the review of mission areas – 
Final report, Publications Office of the European Union, available 
at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/777861 

European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2024a). Karo, E., Barajas, 
A., Sarvaranta, L. et al., Commission Expert Group to support the monitoring of EU missions – Final 

33 

report of the EG, Karo, E.(editor), Barajas, A.(editor), Sarvaranta, L.(editor), Antoniou, L.(editor), 
Boekholt, P.(editor), Monfray, P.(editor), Montante, S.(editor), Subramaniam, S.(editor), Publications 
Office of the European Union, available at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/076494  

European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2024b). Uyarra, 
E., Creating national governance structures for the implementation of EU missions – Mutual learning 
exercise on EU missions implementation at national level – First thematic report, Uyarra, E.(editor), 
Publications Office of the European Union, available at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/724815 

Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., Wanzenböck, I. (2023). Towards a problem-oriented regional industrial 
policy: possibilities for public intervention in framing, valuation and market formation, Regional 
Studies, 57:6, 998-1010, doi: 10.1080/00343404.2021.2016680  

Giacometti, A., Jessen, S. (2024). Making Innovation a Mission? Overview of the Implementation of 
Mission-Oriented Innovation Policies in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. Nordregio report 2024:17, 
available at:  http://doi.org/10.6027/R2024:17.1403-2503 

Goulden, A., Kattel, R. (2024). Designing and implementing mission-oriented policies: Tools and 
resources from the field. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, Policy Report 2024/01, 
available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/publications/2024/feb/designing-and-
implementing-mission-oriented-policies  

Hassink, R., Gong, H., Fröhlich, K., Herr, A. (2022). Exploring the scope of regions in challenge-
oriented innovation policy: The case of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. European Planning Studies, 30 
(11), 2293-2311. 

Hooghe, L., Marks, G. (2003). Unravelling the Central State, but How? Types of Multi-level 
Governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233-243. 

Interreg Europe (2020). Mission-oriented innovation policies: Key learnings, available at: 
https://www.interregeurope.eu/find-policy-solutions/webinar/watch-the-webinar-on-mission-
oriented-innovation-policies 

Interreg Europe (2023). Regional Missions: A Policy Brief from the Policy Learning Platform on 
Research and Innovation, available at: https://www.interregeurope.eu/sites/default/files/2023-
06/Policy%20brief%20on%20regional%20missions.pdf 

Janssen, M., Torrens, J., Wesseling, J., Wanzenböck, I. (2021). The promises and premises of mission-
oriented innovation policy: A reflection and ways forward. Science and Public Policy, 48(3), 438-444. 

JIIP, Joanneum Research, Tecnalia, TNO, VTT, and DTI (2018). Mission-Oriented Research and 
Innovation: Inventory and characterisation of initiatives. 

Karo, E. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policies and bureaucracies in East Asia. Industrial and 
Corporate Change, 27(5), 867-881. 

Kattel, R., Mazzucato, M. (2023). Mission-oriented innovation policies in Europe: From normative to 
epistemic turn? UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, Working Paper Series (IIPP WP 
2023-09), available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/wp2023-09  

Mazzucato, M., Doyle, S., Kuehn von Burgsdorff, L. (2024). Mission-oriented industrial strategy: 
global insights. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, IIPP Policy Report No. 2024/09, 
available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/publications/2024/jul/mission-oriented-
industrial-strategy-global-insights 

34 

Mccann, P., Soete, L., (2020). Place-based innovation for sustainability, Publications Office of the 
European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-20392-6, doi:10.2760/250023, JRC121271 

Molica F., Pontikakis D., Miedzinski M. (2025). Why a challenge-oriented approach is a good match 
for the needs and challenges of EU Cohesion Policy. Environmental Innovation and Societal 
Transitions. Volume 55, June 2025, 100947. 

Morisson, A., Liotard, I., Revest, V. (2023). Small Wins through Inducement Prizes: Introducing 
Challenge-Oriented Regional Prizes (CORP). Sustainability, 15(4), 3240. 

Priebe M., and Herberg J., (2024). Regioning mission-oriented innovation policy: the articulation of 
directionality between federal and regional arenas in the German high-tech strategy. Environmental 
Innovation and Societal Transition, 52, Article 100899. 

Reid A., Steward F., Miedzinski M., (2023). Aligning smart specialisation with transformative 
innovation policy. Lessons for implementing challenge-led missions in smart specialisation, 
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, doi:10.2760/359295, JRC134466 

Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2018). The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it). 
Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(1), 189-209. 

Rohracher, H., Coenen, L., Kordas, O. (2022). Mission incomplete: Layered practices of monitoring 
and evaluation in Swedish transformative innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, available at: 
https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac071 

Tödtling, F., Trippl, M., Desch, V. (2022). New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of 
grand societal challenges. European Planning Studies, 30 (11), 2139-2156. 

TRAMI (2023). Report on the first Mutual Learning Event with ERRIN, available at: 
https://www.trami5missions.eu/report-first-mutual-learning-event-errin  

TRAMI (2024a) Missions Playbook: Stories from practice, available at: 
https://www.vinnova.se/en/publikationer/trami-missions-playbook 

TRAMI (2024b) Report on 2nd European Mission Forum EMiF. Available at: 
https://www.trami5missions.eu/report-second-european-mission-forum-emif 

UCL Institute of Innovation and Public Purpose (2023a). Going far by going together: Insights from 
the innovators driving place-based missions, available at: https://medium.com/iipp-blog/going-far-
by-going-together-insights-from-the-innovators-driving-place-based-missions-29b7b076bb36 

UCL Institute of Innovation and Public Purpose (2023b). Mission-oriented innovation policies in 
Europe: From normative to epistemic turn? available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-
purpose/publications/2023/oct/mission-oriented-innovation-policies-europe-normative-epistemic-
turn  

Uyarra, E., Flanagan, K., Wanzenböck, I. (2023). The spatial and scalar implications of missions: 
Challenges and opportunities for policy. MIOIR Working Paper, No. 2023/4. 

Uyarra, E., Wanzenbock, I., Flanagan, K. (2024). The spatial and scalar implications of missions: 
Challenges and opportunities for policy. Manchester Institute of Innovation Research Working Paper 
Series 2023/24. 

Wanzenböck, I., Frenken, K. (2020). The subsidiarity principle in innovation policy for societal 
challenges. Global Transitions, 2, 51-59. 

35 

List of boxes 

Box 1: Transformation of the automotive sector and future mobility: Gothenburg, Västra Götaland 
region ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 

Box 2: Strategic challenges of automotive sector: Košice, Slovakia ...................................................................... 26 

36 

List of figures 

Figure 1: Horizon Europe mission funding by NUTS3 region ........................................................................................ 9 

Figure 2: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Cancer Mission ....................................... 10 

Figure 3: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Cities Mission .......................................... 10 

Figure 4: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Climate Mission ..................................... 11 

Figure 5: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUT3 region for Ocean and Water Mission .................. 11 

Figure 6: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUTS3 region for Soil Mission .............................................. 12 

Figure 7: Horizon Europe missions funding per NUT3 region for mission coordination and New 
European Bauhaus facility ............................................................................................................................................................. 12 

Figure 8: Key figures on territorial coverage of EU missions .................................................................................... 13 

Figure 9: Distribution of funding by organisation type by mission ........................................................................ 14 

Figure 10: Illustrative mission roadmap for Scotland .................................................................................................... 19 

Figure 11: Differences between Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 ................................................................................ 21 

Figure 12: Urban mobility framework ..................................................................................................................................... 22 

Figure 13: Costs and benefits of sustainable urban mobility transition ............................................................. 23 

Figure 14: New mobility challenges for rural areas ........................................................................................................ 23 

Figure 15: Alternative territorial dimensions and framings for an automotive/mobility mission ......... 27 

37 

Annexes 

Annex 1. Thematic scope of MOIP: exploring missions through the SDG lens 

To gain a deeper overview on the question whether MOIPs at various levels address the 
sustainability objectives in line with the sustainable development goals (SDGs), we analysed the 
results from two data sources. Firstly, we looked at the body of published policy-related 
publications gathered in Overton.io database. Secondly, we explored the data on mission-
oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) aggregated by the EC-OECD STIP Compass. 

Further we explored the matching of this broad set of mission-related policy publications 
(10,875 entries) with the SDGs using a newly developed SDG filter in Overton.io database. 
Overton uses a tailored machine learning algorithm to determine if a publication relates to an 
SDG using a combination of defined keywords. The classifier assigns all SDGs, except for SDG 9: 
Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production and 
SDG 17: Partnership for the Goals, where keywords are too broad to build confidence in the 
retrieved results. The parsing algorithms for the abovementioned three SDGs are currently being 
optimised, hence any results for these SDGs are excluded from the Overton.io results for the 
moment. Accounting for this technical limitation, results included in this study cover only SDGs in 
more specified thematic areas. To ensure that filtered MOIP-related publications focus primarily 
on the SDGs rather than just reference them we applied to the selection also a topic filter 
selecting all SDGs. The result of this filtering and semi-automatic cleaning of document 
duplications reduced the body of 10,875 entries to 1,025 documents from 48 countries. 

The majority of MOIP-related publications address SDGs horizontally. In terms of individual 
SDGs, the documents focus on SDG 13: Climate Action, SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic 
Growth, and SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy. From the Overton.io data, MOIP-related 
documents appear to have surprisingly limited focus on SDG 14: Life Below Water, SDG 15: Life 
on Land, SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities and SDG 10: Reduced Inequality. Most 
policy documents are published by international organisations and the EU. Among individual 
countries, the most represented are the UK, Japan, the US, France, Sweden, Germany, Belgium, 
Ireland and Spain 

The EC-OECD STIP Compass database includes structured information on 23 well-established 
MOIP initiatives across 11 countries. STIP Compass allows for a more focused analysis compared 
to Overton.io as it does include actual policy and programme documents. The database covers 
the five transnational EU missions and selected MOIPs in several EU Member States (Austria, 
Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden), Horizon Europe associated countries 
(Norway and the UK), as well as third countries (Australia, Canada and Japan). 

Most of the reviewed initiatives are ongoing with a preceding implementation history. The cases 
of EU missions and initiatives in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Japan, as 
well as Norwegian Long-term plan for Research and Higher Education and the UK Industrial 
Strategy all represent mission overarching frameworks. Examples from Denmark, as well as 
Swedish Challenge Driven Innovation Initiative, Norwegian Pilot-E and the UK Industrial Strategy 
Challenge Fund comprise mission-oriented programmes and moonshot projects. Austrian 
examples and Norwegian programme CLIMIT are featured as initiatives of precompetitive 
research consortia. While Swedish Strategic Innovation Programmes (SIPs) is the only example 
that represent delegated community programmes. 

Annex 2 provides an overview how the selected MOIPs address the SDGs based on the indicated 
alignment of the MOIP thematic focus areas with the themes of various SDGs (which does not 
necessarily include references to SDGs). Annex 3 gives more detail on the objectives and topics 
addressed by the relevant MOIP initiatives. 

38 

Annex 2. SDGs addressed by established MOIP initiatives 

NO 

Count
ry 

Mission initiative 

SDG1  

SDG2  

SDG3  

No 
poverty 

Zero 
hunger 

Good 
health 
and 
well-
being 

SDG4 
Quality 
educati
on 

SDG5 
Gender 
equalit
y 

SDG6  

Clean 
water 
and 
sanitat
ion 

SDG7 
Afford
able 
and 
clean 
energy 

SDG8 
Decent 
work 
and 
econom
ic 
growth 

SDG9 
Industr
y, 
innovat
ion and 
infrast
ructure 

SDG10 
Reduce
d 
inequal
ities 

SDG11 
Sustain
able 
cities 
and 
commu
nities 

SDG12 
Respon
sible 
consum
ption 
and 
product
ion 

SDG13 
Climate 
action 

SDG14 

SDG15 

Life 
below 
water 

Life on 
land 

SDG17 
Partner
ships 
for the 
goals 

SDG16 
Peace, 
justice 
and 
strong 
institut
ions 

1 

EU 

EU missions 

X 

X 

X 

X 

AT 

BE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Ambient Assisted 
Living – the benefit 
programme 

Mobility of the Future 

Vision 2050 - 
Flanders 

The Vision for a 
Sustainable and 
Competitive 
Bioeconomy in 2030 

6 

DK 

Grand Solutions 

7 

The Danish Climate 
Partnerships 

8 

DE 

Hightech Strategy 
2025 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

39 

NO 

Count
ry 

Mission initiative 

9 

Energiewende 

10 

NL 

Mission Driven Top-
Sector Policy 

SE 

11 

12 

13 

Challenge Driven 
Innovation Initiative 

Strategic Innovation 
Programmes (SIPs) 

Long-term plan for 
Research and Higher 
Education 

14 

NO 

Pilot E 

15 

CLIMIT 

16 

17 

UK 

UK Industrial 
Strategy 

Industrial Strategy 
Challenge Fund 

SDG1  

SDG2  

SDG3  

No 
poverty 

Zero 
hunger 

Good 
health 
and 
well-
being 

SDG4 
Quality 
educati
on 

SDG5 
Gender 
equalit
y 

SDG6  

Clean 
water 
and 
sanitat
ion 

SDG7 
Afford
able 
and 
clean 
energy 

SDG8 
Decent 
work 
and 
econom
ic 
growth 

SDG9 
Industr
y, 
innovat
ion and 
infrast
ructure 

SDG10 
Reduce
d 
inequal
ities 

SDG11 
Sustain
able 
cities 
and 
commu
nities 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

SDG12 
Respon
sible 
consum
ption 
and 
product
ion 

X 

X 

SDG13 
Climate 
action 

SDG14  

SDG15  

Life 
below 
water 

Life on 
land 

SDG17 
Partner
ships 
for the 
goals 

SDG16 
Peace, 
justice 
and 
strong 
institut
ions 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SDG1  

SDG2  

SDG3  

NO 

Count
ry 

Mission initiative 

No 
poverty 

Zero 
hunger 

Good 
health 
and 
well-
being 

X 

SDG4 
Quality 
educati
on 

SDG5 
Gender 
equalit
y 

SDG6  

Clean 
water 
and 
sanitat
ion 

SDG7 
Afford
able 
and 
clean 
energy 

SDG8 
Decent 
work 
and 
econom
ic 
growth 

SDG9 
Industr
y, 
innovat
ion and 
infrast
ructure 

SDG10 
Reduce
d 
inequal
ities 

SDG11 
Sustain
able 
cities 
and 
commu
nities 

SDG12 
Respon
sible 
consum
ption 
and 
product
ion 

SDG13 
Climate 
action 

SDG14  

SDG15  

Life 
below 
water 

Life on 
land 

SDG17 
Partner
ships 
for the 
goals 

SDG16 
Peace, 
justice 
and 
strong 
institut
ions 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

18 

AU 

The Genomics Health 
Future's Mission 
(GHFM) (incomplete) 

19 

CA 

20 

Pan-Canadian 
Framework on Clean 
Growth and Climate 
Change 

Cross-ministerial 
Strategic Innovation 
Promotion Program 
(SIP) 

21 

JP 

Moonshot Research 
and Development 
Program 

22 

Impulsing Paradigm 
Change through 
Disruptive 
Technologies 
(ImPACT) Program 

Source: Authors elaboration based on EC-OECD STIP Compass database and additional desk research 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex 3. Overview of the relevant MOIP initiatives 

NO 

Country 

Mission 
initiative 

Start 
date 

End date 

1 

EU 

EU missions 

2021 

Ongoing 

Main objectives 

Thematic areas / main technological areas 

Type of MOIP 

Provide a new strategic and governance framework to drive 
European Commission's support to research and innovation 
activities toward missions. Each mission aims to solve a pressing 
challenge in society within a certain timeframe and budget. 

-Adaptation to climate change including societal 
transformation 
-Cancer 
-Climate-neutral and smart cities 
-Healthy oceans, seas, coastal and inland waters 
-Soil health and food 

Supranational 
mission overarching 
frameworks 

2 

Austria 

2008 

Ongoing 

Ambient 
Assisted Living 
– the benefit 
programme 

Focuses on the development of products and services based on 
ICT with the objective to increase the quality of life of older 
people, their independence, security and well-being. The funded 
solutions are intended to contribute to increasing and 
strengthening the quality of life, autonomy, participation in social 
life, the skills and professional opportunities of older people. 

ICT-based services and technologies that support 
individuals, their caretakers, families, and care 
organisations 

Precompetitive 
research consortia 

3 

Mobility of the 
Future 

2012 

2020 

To achieve a low-emission mobility in the future, contributing to 
a pathway that is compatible with the government's goal of 
reaching fossil-free mobility by 2050 and position Austria as a 
leader in electro mobility. The usability of the traffic system, 
including issues of inclusion, barrier freedom, accessibility, safety 
and security. 

The four specific research themes of the programme 
are:  
-Personal mobility 
-Goods transport 
-Transport infrastructure 
-Vehicle technologies 

Precompetitive 
research consortia 

4 

Belgium 

Vision 2050 – 
Flanders  

2016 

Ongoing 

Provide a strategic framework for the sustainable transition of 
Flanders. 

5 

The Vision for a 
Sustainable and 
Competitive 
Bioeconomy in 
2030  

2014 

Ongoing 

Support a sustainable bioeconomy and as a transition strategy to 
respond to the threat presented by the exhaustion and use of 
fossil raw materials. 

-Circular economy 
-Smart living 
-Industry 4.0 
-Lifelong learning 
-Healthcare and wellbeing 
-Transport and mobility 
-Energy  
-Green growth 
-Circular economy 
-Bioeconomy 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

42 

 
 
NO 

Country 

Mission 
initiative 

Start 
date 

End date 

Main objectives 

Thematic areas / main technological areas 

Type of MOIP 

6 

Denmark 

Grand Solutions 

2014 

Ongoing 

Support collaborative projects based on excellent research 
focused on solutions of considerable societal value. 

-Better health and clinical research 
-R&I for green transition 
-New technological opportunities.  

7 

The Danish 
Climate 
Partnerships 

2019 

Ongoing 

Develop partnerships between the government and the different 
business communities to contribute to solving the climate 
challenges and meet the climate targets for Denmark. 

8 

Germany 

Hightech 
Strategy 2025 

2006 

Ongoing 

Reinforce the technological competencies of Germany in a 
systematic way. The strategy acts as the coordinative umbrella 
framework for Germany's federal government R&I policies and 
has the primary function of a policy coordination tool. 

-Transport and logistics (land transport, aviation, 
shipping) 
-Waste, water and circular economy 
-Energy, utilities and energy heavy industry 
-Life science and biotechnology  
-Food production and agriculture  
-Building and construction 
-Production and retail 
-Service, IT, finance and consultancy 
Each HTS phase is characterised by a different focus: 
-HTS 2006: development of market potential in core 
technology fields 
-HTS 2010: orientation on specific societal challenges in 
fields like mobility, communication or energy 
-HTS 2014: systemic-perspective on innovation policy 
and participatory approach to bring together 
stakeholders from science, industry and civil society 
-HTS 2020: missions-oriented policy and digitalisation as 
a cross-cutting topic. 

9 

10 

Energiewende 

2010 

Ongoing 

Phase out Germany's nuclear power plants and develop a 
sustainable energy system. 

Technologies covering the entire spectrum of renewable 
energy production as well as energy storage. 

Netherlan
ds 

Mission Driven 
Top-Sector 
Policy 

2011 

2024 

Contribute to a stronger innovative capacity in the Dutch 
economy, but features additional objectives, including to move 
the Netherlands among the top five knowledge economies 
worldwide by 2020; spend 2.5% of GDP on R&D by 2020.  

High Tech Systems and Materials (HTSM), including:  

-Aerospace  
-Horticulture and propagation materials  
-Agriculture and food  
-Life sciences and health  
-Logistics  
-Chemical industry  
-Water  
-Energy  
-Creative industry 

Mission-oriented 
programmes and 
moonshot projects 

Mission-oriented 
programmes and 
moonshot projects 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

43 

 
 
NO 

Country 

Mission 
initiative 

Start 
date 

End date 

Main objectives 

Thematic areas / main technological areas 

Type of MOIP 

11 

Sweden 

12 

13 

Norway 

Challenge 
Driven 
Innovation 
Initiative 

Strategic 
Innovation 
Programmes 
(SIPs) 

Long-term plan 
for Research 
and Higher 
Education 

2011 

Ongoing 

Solve specific societal challenges via broad user-led cooperation 
across sectors, disciplines and policy fields. 

2011 

Ongoing 

2014 

Ongoing 

Stimulate innovation to produce solutions to global challenges 
and create future growth markets by enhancing collaboration 
between a broad range of innovation stakeholders, in areas 
deemed to be strategically important from both a community 
and government perspective. 

Provide a framework for how the Government will reinforce 
research and education to meet the challenges and seize the 
opportunities in the Norwegian knowledge society in the next ten 
years. 

The Plan includes three overarching and interconnected 
objectives: 
-Enhanced competitiveness and innovation 
-Tackling major social challenges 
-Developing research communities of outstanding quality 

Any new, sustainable solutions with potential to help 
meet the challenges identified under the 2030 Agenda. 
Focus on interdisciplinary collaboration rather than on 
any disciplines or technology field. 

Mission-oriented 
programmes and 
moonshot projects 

No technological focus but prominent areas are 
-Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) 
-Energy (in particular energy efficiency and conversion 
to renewable energy) 

Delegated 
community 
programmes 

Includes thematic priority areas: 
- Seas and oceans 
- Climate, the environment and clean energy 
- Public sector renewal and better public services 
- Enabling and industrial technologies 
- Societal security and social cohesion in a globalised 
world 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

14 

15 

Pilot E 

2016 

Ongoing 

Support the development and deployment of new solutions for 
zero climate emissions and energy savings. 

Emission free and energy saving solutions in 
transportation, construction and industry 

CLIMIT 

2005 

Ongoing 

Contribute to the development of carbon capture and storage 
(CCS) technologies and solutions in the areas where Norway has 
national advantages that can be utilised to promote CCS 

CCS technologies 

16 

UK 

UK Industrial 
Strategy 

2017 

Ongoing 

Boost productivity by backing businesses to create good jobs and 
increase the earning power of people throughout the UK with 
investment in skills, industries and infrastructure. 

Main technological areas: 
-Aerospace 
-Artificial Intelligence 
-Automotive 
-Construction 
-Creative industries 
-Life sciences 
-Nuclear 
-Offshore wind 
-Rail 

Mission-oriented 
programmes and 
moonshot projects 

Precompetitive 
research consortia 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

44 

 
NO 

Country 

Mission 
initiative 

Start 
date 

End date 

Main objectives 

Thematic areas / main technological areas 

Type of MOIP 

17 

Industrial 
Strategy 
Challenge Fund 

2016 

2018 

Bring together the UK's world-leading research with business to 
meet the major industrial and societal challenges of our time. It 
provides funding and support to UK businesses and researchers. 

Technologies supported by the fund include:  
-Medical and health technologies 
-Quantum computing 
-Digital security 
-Electric mobility 
-Aeronautics 
-Industrial decarbonisation, manufacturing technologies 
-Plastics and packaging technologies 
-Construction materials 
-Food and agriculture production 

Mission-oriented 
programmes and 
moonshot projects 

18 

Australia 

19 

Canada 

20 

Japan 

The Genomics 
Health Future's 
Mission (GHFM)  

Pan-Canadian 
Framework on 
Clean Growth 
and Climate 
Change  

Cross-
ministerial 
Strategic 
Innovation 
Promotion 
Program (SIP) 

2020 

2028 

Save or transform the lives of over 200,000 Australians through 
genomic research for better testing, diagnosis and treatment. 

-Pathogen genomics 

2016 

Ongoing 

Strategic and governance framework to help Canada meet its 
emissions reduction targets, grow the economy, and build 
resilience to a changing climate. Support a sustainable 
bioeconomy and as a transition strategy to respond to the threat 
presented by the exhaustion and use of fossil raw materials. 

2014 

2022 

Aims to promote integrated research, innovation and 
demonstration activities to both address societal challenges and 
foster economic growth, in areas where strong interministerial 
coordination is needed. 

-Green growth 
-Climate change mitigation and adaptation 
-Bioeconomy 

In its second term (2018-2022), the SIP focus upon 12 
themes: 

-Big data and AI-enabled cyberspace technologies 
-Intelligent knowledge processing infrastructure 
integrating physical and virtual domains 
-Cyber physical security for the Internet of Things 
society 
-Automated driving for universal services 
-‘Materials integration’ for revolutionary design system 
of structural materials 
-Photonics and quantum technology for Society 5.0 
-Technologies for smart bio-industry and agriculture 
-Energy systems toward a decarbonised society 
-Enhancement of national resilience against natural 
disasters 
-Innovative AI hospital system 
-Smart logistics service 
-Innovative technology for exploration of deep-sea 
resources 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

45 

 
NO 

Country 

Mission 
initiative 

Start 
date 

End date 

Main objectives 

Thematic areas / main technological areas 

Type of MOIP 

21 

22 

No focus on any particular areas. Driven by missions. 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

2020 

Ongoing 

Moonshot 
Research and 
Development 
Program 

Seven Moonshot goals with clear timeline: 
1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Realisation of a fault-tolerant universal quantum computer 
that will revolutionize economy, industry, and security by 
2050 
Creation of the industry that enables sustainable global 
food supply by exploiting unused biological resources by 
2050 
Realisation of sustainable resource circulation to recover 
the global environment by 2050 
Realisation of AI robots that autonomously learn, adapt to 
their environment, evolve in intelligence and act alongside 
human beings, by 2050 
Realisation of ultra-early disease prediction and interven-
tion by 2050 
Realisation of a society in which human beings can be free 
from limitations of body, brain, space, and time by 2050 
Realisation of a sustainable medical and care system to 
overcome major diseases by 2040, for enjoying one's life 
with relief and release from health concerns until 100 
years old. 

2014 

2019 

Impulsing 
Paradigm 
Change through 
Disruptive 
Technologies 
(ImPACT) 
Program 

New goals are being developed in relation to the post-covid 
society. 

Encourage high-risk, high-impact R&D and generate disruptive 
innovation. No formal missions but each project had to target on 
the five following challenges in less than five years: 
-Release from constraints on resources and innovation in 
‘monozukuri (manufacturing)’ capabilities (Japan-style value 
creation for the new century) 
-Realisation of an ecologically sound society and innovative 
energy conservation that changes lifestyles (Living in harmony 
with the world) 
-Realisation of a society of highly advanced functionality that 
surpasses the information networked society (Smart community 
that links people with society) 
-Provide the world's most comfortable living environment in a 
society with a declining birth rate and aging population (Realise 
healthy and comfortable lives for everybody) 
-Control the impact and minimize the damage from hazards and 
natural disasters that are beyond human knowing (Realise a 
resilience that is keenly felt by very individual Japanese) 

No focus on any particular areas. Driven by missions. 

National mission 
overarching 
frameworks 

Source: EC-OECD STIP Compass, adapted and complemented by authors 

46 

 
Annex 4. Regions with automotive and mobility priorities in S3 2021-2027 

Region name 
(NUTS ID) 

Priority 

Strategy 

Brussels 
(BE1)  

Efficient and sustainable urban flows for inclusive 
urban space management 

The Regional Innovation Plan  

(Energy efficiency and smart energy, smart building) 

Central 
Ostrobothni
a (FI1D5) 

Efficient and environmentally friendly transport 
arrangements, logistics, and transport, boat design, 
and building 

Central Finland Strategy 2025-
2050  

Kymenlaaks
o (FI1C4)  

Bourgogne 
Franche-
Comté (FRC)  

(Efficient transport, environmentally friendly, 
transport logistics, boat design, logistics solutions, 
design solutions) 

Smart and green logistics 

(Eco-friendly transport, route optimisation, carbon 
footprint tracking, clean freight, green warehousing, 
efficient packaging, electric fleets, supply chain 
transparency) 

Sustainable, Intelligent & Connected Mobility: 
Innovative Vehicles 

(Electric vehicles, connectivity, intelligent transport 
systems, green mobility, smart infrastructure, 
transportation networks, vehicle-to-everything, 
communication, emission reductions) 

Kymenlaakso Regional Programme 
2022-2025  

Regional Innovation Strategy for 
Smart Specialisation (RIS3) 2021-
2027  

Guadeloupe 
(FRY1)  

Sustainable mobility on land and sea and adapted 
mobility 

Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) 
of Guadeloupe  

(Electric vehicles, public transportation, eco-friendly 
ships, carpooling, bike sharing, green infrastructure, 
maritime transport, urban planning, mobility solutions, 
adaptive technology) 

Ile-de-
France (FR1)  

Aeronautics, space, defence, sustainable and smart 
mobility 

Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) 
2021-2027  

(Aerospace engineering, satellite technology, defense 
systems, electric vehicles, space exploration, aviation 
safety, military tech, smart transportation, rocket 
propulsion, urban air mobility) 

Nouvelle 
Aquitaine 
(FRI)  

Land Mobility: Automotive, Rail Industries 

(Automotive, rail, other land mobility, inter/intra 
mobility, embedded systems, connectivity) 

Strategy for Economic Growth, 
Innovation, and Global Outreach 

Occitanie 
(FRJ)  

Adapt ports for efficiency, attractiveness, and 
environmental respect 

: 

(Green infrastructure, efficient logistics, renewable 
energy integration, waste recycling, aesthetic 
enhancement, eco-friendly amenities, digital 
transformation, biodiversity conservation, carbon-
neutral operations, clean water management) 

47 

 
Region name 
(NUTS ID) 

Priority 

Pays de la 
Loire (FRG)  

Bayern 
(DE2)  

Hessen 
(DE7)  

Mecklenburg
-Western 
Pomerania 
(DE8)  

Rhineland-
Palatinate 
(DEB)  

Maritime economy 

(Maritime economy, shipbuilding, nautical activities, 
renewable marine energies, marine biotechnology) 

Mobility 

(Propulsion technology, autonomous and connected 
mobility, future-oriented mobility, infrastructure for 
future mobility) 

Mobility and logistics 

Mechanical and plant engineering 

(Industry 4.0, joining technology,  lightweight 
construction,  mechatronics, individual production, 
specific product,  process innovation, resource-
efficient production, machinery, maritime 
technologies, automotive,  renewable energy, 
aerospace,  electrical engineering, Electronics, food 
industry,  wood industry) 

Automotive and commercial vehicles industry 

(Automotive industry, commercial vehicles, energy 
transition, sustainable mobility, vehicle parts, 
accessories, electric vehicles, battery cells, alternative 
propulsion technologies, testing grounds, 
infrastructure) 

Strategy 

Updated Regional Innovation 
Strategy for Smart Specialisation 
(RIS) for the period 2021-2027  

Innovations State Bavaria Bavarian 
Innovation Strategy 2021-2027  

Hessian Innovation Strategy 2021-
2027: Sustainable – Digital – 
Connected 

Regional Innovation Strategy for 
Intelligent Specialisation of the 
State of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 
2021-2027  

Updating of the Regional 
Innovation Strategy of Rheinland-
Pfalz  

Saxony 
(DED)  

Mobility 

Innovation Strategy of the Free 
State of Saxony (Update  

Sachsen-
Anhalt (DEE)  

Mobility and logistics 

Data unavailable  

(Safety, efficiency, and environmental friendliness of 
urban road networks.) 

Attica 
(EL30)  

Sustainable Shipping 

Transport and Logistics Chain 

Central 
Macedonia 
(EL52)  

Automotive 

48 

The 2021-2027 RIS3 was 
designed at national level taking 
into account the regional 
specialisations as proposed by the 
country’s regions. Therefore, there 
is a unified national RIS3 with 
regional specialisations.  

The 2021-2027 RIS3 was 
designed at national level taking 
into account the regional 
specialisations as proposed by the 
country’s regions. Therefore, there 
is a unified national RIS3 with 
regional specialisations.  

 
 
 
 
 
Region name 
(NUTS ID) 

Priority 

Strategy 

Abruzzo 
(ITF1)  

Abruzzo 
(ITF1)  

Aosta Valley 
(ITC2)  

Calabria 
(ITF6)  

Emilia-
Romagna 
(ITH5)  

(Motor propulsion systems, hydrogen-based 
technologies, renewable and low-carbon energy 
sources, innovative products, light materials, 
multifunctional materials, recyclable materials, 
integrated production systems, weight reduction, time 
reduction, cost reduction) 

Sustainable mobility and Tourism 

(Sustainable mobility, tourism innovation, digital 
technologies, green infrastructure, intelligent 
transportation systems, SMEs) 

Sustainable mobility 

(Autonomous mobility, smart mobility, smart 
transport system services, mobility decarbonisation) 

Logistics and sustainable mobility 

(Sustainable transport systems, smart sustainable 
shipping) 

Sustainable and innovative mobility 

(Ecological debt, natural resources, climate change, 
green deal, sustainable transportation, 
environmentally friendly transportation, migration and 
displacement, forced migration, equal access to 
transportation) 

Italy (IT)  

Digital Agenda, Smart Communities, Smart Mobility 
Systems 

(Smart urban mobility systems, logistics, urban 
safety, environmental monitoring, critical events 
prevention, hazards prevention, embedded electronic 
systems, smart sensor networks, Internet of Things, 
smart building technologies, energy efficiency, 
environmental sustainability, ultra-wide band, web 
economy) 

Lazio (ITI4)  

Automotive and Sustainable Mobility 

Lombardy 
(ITC4)  

Piedmont 
(ITC1)  

(Automotive sector, electric vehicles, digitalisation, 
sustainable mobility) 

Smart mobility and architecture 

(Electrification of vehicles, vehicle-infrastructure 
interaction, alternative fuels, urban air mobility, 
architecture, sensorization of components,5g 
connectivity) 

Mobility 

(Transportation sector research, vehicle 
manufacturing, sustainable mobility systems) 

Auto-Moto-Aero-Space 

49 

Smart Specialisation Strategy in 
Abruzzo S3 2021-2027   

Smart Specialisation Strategy in 
Abruzzo S3 2021-2027   

Smart Specialisation Strategy of 
the Autonomous Region of Valle 
d'Aosta 2021-2027  

The Smart Specialisation Strategy 
for Research and Innovation of 
Calabria Region  

Research Strategy and Innovation 
for Smart Specialisation 2021-
2027   

The good governance of the 
National Strategy for Smart 
Specialisation 2021-2027  

Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) 
Lazio Region  

The Smart Specialisation Strategy 
for Research and Innovation in 
Lombardy Region  

The Smart Specialisation Strategy 
Piedmont Region  

 
Region name 
(NUTS ID) 

Priority 

Strategy 

Lower 
Silesian 
(PL51) 

Subcarpathi
an (PL82)  

Kuyavian-
Pomeranian 
(PL61) 

(Electric vehicles, autonomous driving, connected 
vehicles, green aviation, space tourism, satellite 
technologies, hybrid propulsion systems, urban air 
mobility) 

Lower Silesian Innovation Strategy 
2030  

Automotive 

: 

(Manufacture of cars, buses, minibuses, motorcycles, 
tractors, semi-trailers, trailers, rolling stock, railways,) 

Transport and Mobility 

(Intelligent & sustainable transport systems) 

Regional Smart Specialisation 
Strategy RIS3 2021+  

Poland (PL)  

Environmentally friendly transport 

: 

Warmian-
Masurian 
(PL62) 

West 
Pomeranian 
(PL42) 

Lisbon 
(PT17)  

Alentejo 
(PT18)  

Logistics - Horizontal Area 

(Logistics, information, trade) 

Blue economy and green transport 

Mobility and Transport 

(Public transportation Innovation, mobility 
digitalization, door-to-door solutions, electric vehicle 
adoption, mobility data governance, mobility-as-a-
service promotion, metropolitan communication 
platform) 

Mobility and Logistics 

(Mobility, aerospace, maritime transport, 
decarbonization, renewable fuels, aeronautics, energy 
efficiency) 

Warmińsko-Mazurskie 2030 
Social-Economic Development 
Strategy  

Entrepreneurship Development 
Plan based on Smart 
Specialisations of Podlaskie 
Voivodeship 2021-2027+   

Regional Strategy for Smart 
Specialisation of Lisbon RIS3 
LISBOA 2021-2027  

Regional Strategy for Smart 
Specialisation 

Norte (PT11)  

Sustainable Mobility and Energy Transition 

(Electric mobility, climate change adaptation, 
biodiversity protection, energy efficiency, renewable 
energy) 

Northern Development Strategy 
for the 2021-2027   

South-West 
(RO22)  

Transport systems 

West (RO42) 

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and 
Automotive 

Slovenia (SI)   Mobility 

(Automotive industry, mobility solutions, advanced 
infrastructure, e-mobility) 

National Research, Innovation, and 
Smart Specialisation Strategy 
2022-2027  

Smart Specialisation Strategy 
2021 - 2027 North-West 
Development Region  

Slovenian Strategy for Sustainable 
Smart Specialisation  

50 

 
 
 
 
 
Region name 
(NUTS ID) 

Priority 

Slovakia 
(SK)  

Innovative industry for the 21st century: 21st-century 
Mobility 

Strategy 

DRAFT Research and Innovation 
Strategy for Smart Specialisation 
of the Slovak Republic 2021-2027  

Regional Innovation Strategy for 
Smart Specialisation Gävleborg  

Västernorrland regional innovation 
strategy for smart specialisation  

Strategy Smart Specialisation in 
Norrbotten  

Smart Specialisation Strategy for 
Östergötland  

Regional innovation strategy 2022 
– 2030  

Strategy for Smart Specialisation 
of Navarre Update 2021-2027 

(Research and innovation, automated systems, robotic 
systems, reconfigurable systems, smart systems, 
manufacturing, logistics, industry IoT technologies) 

Smart Sustainable Cities and Communities 

(ICT, energy efficiency, urban planning, waste 
management, human health impact) 

Autonomous mobility 

Tourism Industry 

(Nature tourism, cultural tourism, historical tourism) 

Effective Logistics 

(Logistics, efficient systems, education and training, 
skilled drivers) 

Mobility of the Future 

(Autonomous mobility solutions, green transport 
methods, future-driven mobility research) 

Electric and connected mobility 

(Value chain transformation, vehicle components, 
sustainability solutions, mobility service models, 
energy storage systems) 

Sustainable mobility 

: 

Logistics and smart mobility 

(Reduction of emissions, electric mobility in cities) 

Regional Strategy for Smart 
Specialisation (S3)  

Sustainable mobility and logistics system 

(Public transportation, logistics, accessibility, smart 
cities) 

Tractor industries 

(Advanced transport and mobility systems ,industry, 
Industrialized construction) 

Strategy for Smart Specialisation 
of Catalonia 2030  

Smart Specialisation Strategy for 
the Sustainability of Andalusia S4 
2021-2027  

Gävleborg 
County 
(SE313)  

Västernorrla
nd County 
(SE321)  

Norrbotten 
County 
(SE332)  

Östergötlan
d County 
(SE123)  

Västra 
Götaland 
County 
(SE232)  

Navarre 
(ES22)  

Aragon 
(ES24)  

Castilla-La 
Mancha 
(ES42)  

Catalonia 
(ES51)  

Andalusia 
(ES61)  

Source: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/assets/s3-observatory/index_en.html 

51 

 
 
 
 
Getting in touch with the EU 

In person 

All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct centres. You can find the address of the 
centre nearest you online (european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/meet-us_en). 

On the phone or in writing 

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact this 
service: 

— by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), 

— at the following standard number: +32 22999696, 

— via the following form: european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/write-us_en. 

Finding information about the EU 

Online 

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa 
website (european-union.europa.eu). 

EU publications 

You can view or order EU publications at op.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free 
publications can be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local documentation centre (european-
union.europa.eu/contact-eu/meet-us_en). 

EU law and related documents 

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1951 in all the official language 
versions, go to EUR-Lex (eur-lex.europa.eu). 

EU open data 

The portal data.europa.eu provides access to open datasets from the EU institutions, bodies and 
agencies. These can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial and non-commercial 
purposes. The portal also provides access to a wealth of datasets from European countries. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The Joint Research Centre (JRC) provides 
independent, evidence-based knowledge and 
science, supporting EU policies to positively 
impact society 

EU Science Hub 
Joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu