Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

*|*

# 52012DC0174

**REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Interim Evaluation of the European Metrology Research Programme - EMRP /\* COM/2012/0174 final \*/**

  

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

Interim Evaluation of the European
Metrology Research Programme - EMRP

1.           Context and Overview of the EMRP

By Decision of 16 September 2009 of the
European Parliament and the Council the EU agreed to participate in a joint
research programme called Eureopean Metrology Research Programme – EMRP[1], with a contribution of up to
€200 million for the period 2009-2017, equivalent to the contributions of the
22 Participating States[2].
The above mentioned Decision (hereinafter the “EMRP Decision”) is based on
Article 185 TFEU (previous Article 169 EC Treaty) which, in implementing the
Multiannual Framework Programme, makes it possible to coordinate national
research programmes, through a voluntary integration process between the
Participating States, covering scientific, management and financial
integration. The joint implementation of the national research programmes
requires the establishment or existence of a dedicated implementation
structure. The participating States had agreed to propose EURAMET e.V.[3] as dedicated implementation
structure to implement the EMRP. The dedicated implementation structure should
be the recipient of the Union financial contribution and should ensure the
efficient execution of the EMRP.

The core activity of the EMRP consist of
funding multi-partner trans-national projects addressing research, technological
development, training and dissemination activities (EMRP projects). In view of
the concentrated capacities in metrology, the core part of the EMRP projects
shall be executed by National Metrology Institutes and Designated Institutes
(namely, specialist institutes responsible for certain national standards and
associated services that are not covered by the activities of the National
Metrology Institutes) from the participating States. In order to increase and
diversify capacities in metrology, the EMRP also funds several researcher grant
schemes which complement the EMRP projects.

In the EMRP Decision the Parliament and the
Council recalled that metrology is a cross-disciplinary scientific field which
is a vital component of a modern knowledge-based society. Reliable and
comparable measurement standards, and appropriate validated measuring and test
methods underpin the processes of scientific advancement and technological
innovation and thus have a significant impact on the economy and quality of life
within Europe.

In its Communication on the Innovation
Union Flagship Initiative[4],
adopted in the context of the EU's growth strategy “Europe 2020”[5], the Commission underlined the
importance of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth for our citizens with targets
and actions at EU and national levels. Central to the EU's strategy are all
efforts to turn the European Union into an Innovation Union.

The concept of partnering in European
research and innovation to pool forces, achieve breakthroughs and tackle societal
challenges was put forward recently in a Communication from the Commission[6] to Council and European
Parliament. Council recognised in its conclusions[7], that partnering can facilitate
the optimal use of resources and hence develop full use of Europe’s
intellectual capital and contribute to the integration of ERA as well as reduce
unnecessary duplication. Partnering brings together European and national
players to build critical mass, joint visions and strategic agendas, making use
of flexibility, scale and scope. In the same manner the EMRP has established a
strong partnership betweeen the 22 Participating States starting in 2009.

The EMRP Decision requires an interim
evaluation of the EMRP carried out by the Commission with the help of
independent experts three years after the start of the EMRP. This evaluation
shall cover progress towards the objectives as well as recommendations
concerning the EMRP on the most appropriate ways to further enhance integration
and the quality and efficiency of the implementation, including scientific,
management and financial integration and whether the level of the financial
contributions of the participating States is appropriate, given the potential
demand from their various national research communities.

The Commission shall communicate to the
European Parliament and the Council the conclusions thereof, accompanied by its
own observations.

An expert panel supported the Commission in
this evaluation with its findings and issued the interim evaluation report
(hereinafter the "Report") which provides an in-depth analysis of
EMRP concerning the progress towards the initial objectives as well as
recommendations on the most appropriate ways to further enhance integration and
the quality and efficiency of this initiative.

The present Report provides the Commission
views on the main recommendations expressed by the experts in the Report[8].

2.           Interim evaluation of the
Independent expert group: Commission’s observations

The Group’s Report covered all relevant
aspects as requested by the EMRP Decision and provided an important number of
facts, comments and recommendations. The Commission considers the whole Report
as being an integral part of the Interim evaluation process. The Commission
will therefore highlight, in the following sub-paragraphs of this chapter, the
most relevant findings/recommendations concerning the EMRP and express its view
respectively.

2.1 Quality and efficiency of the
implementation

In
delegating the implementation of EMRP to a Designated Implementation Structure
(DIS) the Commission has followed the provision of Article 185 TFEU and the
rules applying to indirect centralised management in accordance with the
Financial Regulation. EURAMET e.V. has been the selected DIS and its governance
structure has proved to be efficient and of high quality for the implementation
of the EMRP. Considering not only the operational strength of EMRP but also its
scientific content the Panel noticed that increased visibility of EMRP beyond
the metrology community would be beneficial for the wider stakeholder community
and society in general.

The
Commission welcomes the strong engagement and professional management of
EURAMET e.V. and the EMRP Committee in the implemantion of the EMRP in its
first three years since 2009 and encourages all relevant instance in relation
to the EMRP implementation to continuously improve the quality of
implementation and the visibility of the programme.

The Commission endorses the Panel recommendation
to establish a key performance indicator (KPI) for time-to-contract and set
targets for improvement in order to start all projects as soon as possible
after their selection.

2.2 Financial contributions from the
Participating States

(1)
The EMRP Decision made the Union contribution
depend on the formal commitment by each participating State to contribute its
share of financing for the EMRP and the effective payment of the financial
contribution to beneficiaries. The total national commitment of all 22
Participating States was fixed to at least EUR 200 million and included 10% in
cash mainly to cover all running costs (up to 16 million €) of the management
of EMRP and for the remainder contributing to the grant schemes. In addition EURAMET provided evidence of adequate financial guarantees by the
participating States to the Commission, in accordance with Article 8 of the
Decision. The amounts guaranteed by the participating States are calculated
according to a pre-established fixed allocation key per Participating State.
The guarantees have been constituted by means of guarantee or liability
declarations by the participating States or by their national metrology
institutes towards the Commission.

(2)
To date all financial contributions from the
Participating States have been honoured in full respect of the procedures set
out for the implementation of the EMRP. The national contributions to selected
projects have been made in full respect of all agreed procedures.

The
Commission recognises that the Participating States hounoured their initial
commitments as layed down in the EMRP Decision and agrees with the Panel that
EMRP has achieve a high level of financial integration with its financing
model.

2.3 Integration of national metrology
research programmes

The
EMRP initiative aims at aligning and integrating relevant national metrology
research activities to establish a joint research programme featuring
scientific, management and financial integration.

The level of scientific integration can be
considered as a major achievement of the EMRP but also as a major benefit for
the national metrology programmes involved. The ‘Grand Challenge’ approach has
fostered widely inter-disciplinary cooperation between the national metrology research
programmes. Even so third parties are to some extent involved in the EMRP
projects, their involvement and influence on the programming seems sometimes
limited and could be increased in areas of strong multi-disciplinary nature.
Whilst it seems appropriate that the main focus of the EMRP should be on the
development and strengthening of competences and capabilities of the national
metrology or specialised dedicated institutes, the Panel believes that third
party experts can add value to this specialised community. In addition the
involvement of the wider research community could be strengthened further in
certain areas which go beyond the typical metrology research aspects.

In agreeing jointly on potential research
topics for each call for proposals and deciding on which topics will be
selected for further consideration, the EMRP Committee is the instance which
takes a joint strategic view of the priorities for metrology research across
Europe. The Panel highlighted that the EMRP research topics have been well
chosen, that the EMRP is globally recognized and can avoid very costly
duplications. An estimated 50% of the national investment is now coordinated
within the scope and topics of the EMRP and thus it is clear that considerable
scientific integration of core national funding is being realised.

However, the difference in committed
resources to the EMRP between the large and small contributors is considerable
as it was agreed in the Decision. Consequently the scientific competence and
the existing research infrastructures are largely divergent which makes a full
scientific integration between all 22 Participating States sometimes difficult.
A major barrier for the small and developing national metrology institutes is
their limited capability to participate with expert staff in EMRP projects and
their limited financial resources. The Panel is of the opinion that this
creates a strong risk that the existing gap in competence and capabilities
between the well established, big metrology institutes and the developing,
small metrology institutes will become bigger instead of smaller.

The Commission shares the Panel's view that
the capacity gap between the Participating Countries seems to increase in some
cases and agrees with the Panel opinion that the Researcher Grant System could
be used more effectively to increase further the possibilities for countries
with limited metrology research capacities. The Commission fully endorses the
Panel recommendation to explore the degree of flexibility that could be applied
to the management of the mobility grants to overcome the relocation barrier.

The management integration has been
achieved within EURAMET e.V., which has proved to be a professional
organisation that is working well. Where needed, improvements have been and are
still being made so the EMRP can be considered as effective in its
implementation. The current management structure is regarded as both efficient
and integrated.

Nevertheless, the Panel noticed a need to
explore ways of reducing and simplifying unnecessary bureaucratic procedures.
The administrative burden for coordinators and participants in projects is
considered high and the execution of projects may be delayed by the
difficulties related to the grant contracts. The Researcher Grant model
contract has been improved in 2011 and covers as of 2012 only essential aspects
of the grant. In spite of these improvements, the Panel reported that the
opinion persists that the Researcher Grant system is not working properly and
should be reconsidered.

Another concern expressed by several EMRP
Committee members and by the Panel is the necessity to have sufficient and
competent project coordinators, who start the projects as soon as possible
after the selection decision. The Panel concluded that there seems to be a
general lack of professional competence in the management of complex
international research projects.

The
Commission agrees therefore with the Panel to harmonise further the management
procedures and encourages EURAMET e.V. to provide European research project
management training for project coordinators and potential project partners.

The
financial integration of the EMRP is at a high level and the Panel concluded
that further financial integration would be difficult to achieve due to the
block funding nature of the national institutes which correspond to the
national commitments of the Participating States. The EMRP uses a "virtual
common pot" system combined with an appropriate reserve funding mechanism
which allows financing projects equal to a "real common pot" system.
The EMRP governance and its high financial integration make sure that available
funding per call always matches the need from the proposers' side. In this way
the order of the ranking lists of the central and independent evaluations has
been for all three calls fully respected without any exception.

2.4 Progress towards the objectives

To analyse the progress towards the
objectives of the EMRP, the Panel returned to the ex-ante impact assessment[9] that outlined the general
policy objectives, the specific objectives and the operational objectives of
the EMRP.

With
regard to the general policy objectives the Panel concludes that the EMRP has
made substantial progress in relation to the free movement of knowledge within
the ERA. Strong cooperation between the main research actors in the field has
been generated in order to support the development of knowledge and growth to
support Europe's competitiveness at global scale. The partial focus on the
grand challenges related to energy, environment and health is enabling more
interdisciplinary collaboration within the metrology community to address
societal need. The Panel concludes that the EMRP contributes
to the realisation of the European Research Area (ERA) by implementing a
genuine “European Metrology Research Area” (MERA).

With
regard to the specific objectives the Panel underlines the structuring effect
in relation to financial integration which has taken place already in the first
years of the EMRP. There is also another useful structuring effect observed,
that is apparent through the elaborate annual process of setting priorities for
the Joint Calls, which seems to be influencing national priorities in some
countries. The structuring effect and de-fragmentation is clearly greater in
those countries operating with a centralised metrology system. It is too early
to assess these structuring effects on industry, society and the exploitation
of new technologies but the Panel seems convinced that a level of critical mass
is being achieved that would have been impossible without the EMRP.

The
EMRP operational objectives cover issues related to the grand challenges,
capacity building, open access to infrastructures, increasing collaboration
with the wider scientific community, modernisation, mobility of young
researchers, better coordination of international affairs, supporting
regulation & standards and supporting industry and economic growth. According
to the Decision the EMRP is expected to achieve these operational objectives in
the following way:

a)
Pooling excellence in metrology research - by creating competitive joint
research projects (hereinafter referred to as "EMRP projects")
marshalling capability of sufficient critical mass from the networks of
national metrology institutes and designated institutes from the Participating
States to tackle major metrology challenges faced at European level;

b)
Openness of the system to best science - by increasing participation from the
wider European researcher community through researcher grants;

c)
Capacity building - by increasing the capability of the European metrology
researcher community through researcher mobility grants targeting those EURAMET
Member Countries with limited metrology research capability.

The Panel
highlighted with great satisfaction that the pooling excellence in metrology
research has been achieved within the European metrology community. EURAMET e.V.
and the EMRP Committee should be congratulated on facilitating the scientific
coordination according to the Panel. The Panel encouraged possible improvements
in the selection process for Strategic Research Topics for each Call, which
could be even more supportive to opening the EMRP to all relevant stakeholder
needs. Such an approach may be more supportive to exploitation of results at
industry and regulatory level and may call for an enlargement of the existing
metrology research capabilities within the national institutes and beyond.

The
Commission endorses the Panel recommendation and encourages EURAMET e. V. to
explore the potential added value of organising stakeholder workshops to
prioritise Strategic Research Topics, especially for Grand Challenge Calls
where a more open-minded culture would be desirable.

The
Commission further agrees with the Panel's recommendation that certain research
topics would benefit from an increased weighting of the impact criteria related
to rapid exploitation of results within Europe.

In contrast to
the great success of pooling excellence in the core metrology community itself,
the opening of the system to the best science has so far been limited. The Panel
reports a clear external perception that the EMRP still seems to be rather
closed to the wider European research community.

The Commission therfore encourages EURAMET
e.V. as recommended by the Panel to explore ways to better use the grant
schemes to foster links with the best centres of excellence across Europe.

In its further analysis
the Panel finally concludes that the EMRP is not having the desired effect in
terms of capacity building in those countries with limited or no metrology
research capability. While some countries have taken advantage of the programme
to build capacity in strategic areas of interest, the capacity gap with the
most research-intensive countries seems to increase.

It should also
be noted that the mechanisms in the existing EMRP related to opening of the
system to the best science and the capacity building have been based mainly on
the grant system within EMRP. It seems that the financial capacity of the grant
system itself is not the major bottleneck. The Panel reminded that the existing
EMRP is designed by the EMRP Decision as a research programme striving towards
scientific excellence with its specific operational processes and financial
instruments and the running EMRP can not easily support in addition the complex
issue of capacity building. In this respect the Panel has given interesting and
important recommendations for a potential longer term future of the EMRP.

The
Commission shares the Panel views on the progress towards the objectives as
reported and the Commission fully endorses the recommandation to use expert
facilitators to foster better inclusion of those countries with limited
metrology research capacity with the aim of closing the gap with the more
advanced countries.

2.5 European added value of the EMRP

The
Panel expressed its strong view that the EMRP is an excellent model of what can
be achieved by coordinating core-funded national R&D programmes. The Panel
highlighted three particular aspects of the EMRP in providing substantial
European added value:

·
EMRP allows for critical mass to address even
complex, interdisciplinary topics such as the grand societal challenges, which
would be beyond the capacities of a single country.

·
EMRP is pooling substantial resources and brings
together research efforts in the field of metrology from 22 countries. The
Panel estimates that about 50% of total dedicated metrology funding in Europe
is now coordinated through the EMRP, which along with the EU contribution,
amounts to a EUR 400 million in a single joint programme.

·
The Panel recognises a
"de-fragmentation" of research efforts and observed that a reduction
in unnecessary duplication is achieved through both the elaborate planning and
implementation of each joint call (joint programming).

Against this background
the Panel encourages EURAMET e. V. to consider how EMRP project results can be
rapidly exploited by European industry and suggests focusing more attention on
innovation and knowledge transfer activities on a longer term basis.

Another domain that has both European and
national value added is the EMRP in its support to regulation in general like
for example environmental regulation such as the European Water Framework
Directive. The Panel recalled that the development and definition of
metrological aspects of such regulations are examples where the metrology
research community collaborating under the auspices of EMRP and EURAMET e.V. should
be playing a leading role in developing underpinning new measurement methods.
The Panel is of the opinion that this requires a wide level of foresight
activities and early engagement with policy makers and regulatory authorities
at national and European level. Only if this level of cooperation is achieved
the EMRP will be able to exploit its full potential in support of the Union
policies.

The
Commission encourages EURAMET e.V. on the basis of the Panel recommendation to
explore options for foresight workshops with regulatory ministries/agencies and
the relevant Commission Directorate-Generals.

In addition to
possible foresight activities towards regulatory matters, the Panel noticed
that metrology aspects in relation to ‘new technologies’ is a field in which
the metrology community can support the growth of emerging sectors, where there
is a need to develop new or more accurate measurement methodologies. "New
technologies" seem therefore an area where there should be more collaboration
with the wider research community either directly within EMRP projects but also
potentially through coordination with complementary FP7 projects and actors.

The
Commission welcomes the Panel recommendation to explore the potential added value of creating
incentives to enable cross-fertilisation between complementary EMRP and FP7
actors and projects.

2.6 The future development of EMRP beyond
FP7 and lessons learned for future joint programmes in general

The Panel is of
the opinion that beside the possible above mentioned improvements for the
running EMRP, there are also a number of lessons for future joint programmes in
general. These lessons include some that are generic and others that are
specific to the situation of the European metrology community – for example,
the extensive use of national ‘institutional or block’ funding.

The Commission welcomes, without
pre-empting any decision on the future of EMRP beyond FP7, the initiative taken
by the Panel to advise on eleven possible issues to be considered for the design
of any future initiative which should enable EURAMET e.V. to reach for higher
levels of European integration.

Concerning the lessons for future joint
programmes the Panel expressed its view that EMRP could be in some cases an
example for Joint Programming activities or other initiatives, in case they
would make use of Article 185 TFEU for the implementation of a joint programme. The Panel
concluded that not all interested Member States may have yet suitable running
programmes to integrate within a joint programme or the programmes are not
flexible enough to do so. It needs to be considered that in most EU countries,
limited competitive funding is available for coordination at European level.

In the opinion of the expert panel, it is
particularly difficult to achieve financial integration under Article 185
initiatives and EMRP is a showcase how a "virtual common pot" based
on in-kind contribution can achieve a very high level of financial integration.

The Commission
welcomes the Panel reflections concerning future joint programmes and will
continue its coordination activities between the different running Article 185
initiatives, in order to draw lessons learned for the future to provide for
support to potential public-public partnerships under Horizon2020.

3.           Conclusion

Having started in 2009, the EMRP
operational performance has achieved maturity as a joint research prgramme
between 22 Participating States, implemented by EURAMET e.V. The integration
between the participating national programmes is considered high. The
Commission will therefore continue to support the current programme as foreseen
in the EMRP Decision.

The EMRP is performing well after 3 years to
most of its initial operational objectives in what concerns nearly 85% of the
EMRP resources, namely the pooling of excellence in metrology research. However
there are significant gaps between expectation and reality in relation to three
qualitative impact indicators: capacity building, interaction with the wider
scientific community and mobility.

EURAMET e.V. and the EMRP Committee as the
highest instances in the EMRP governance are invited to make all necessary
efforts to improve this situation in the remaining period of the programme.
While no changes to the initial Decision are considered necessary the above
mentioned Panel recommendations should be implemented by EURAMET e.V. as well
as any additional measure that EURAMET members may consider useful or necessary
to improve the capacity building, the interaction with the wider scientific
community and the mobility within the EMRP.

Finally, the
Commission will during the next years be open to engage with EURAMET e.V. into preliminery
discussions on the possible follow up for the current EMRP in the context of
the next programming period, without prejudice to the final decision about
HORIZON 2020 and the EU Multi-Annual Financial Framework, taking into
consideration the wider political context of the EUROPE 2020 strategy.

[1]               DECISION No 912/2009/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL of 16 September 2009 on the participation by the Community
in a European metrology research and development programme undertaken by
several Member States (OJ L257, 30.09.2009, p.12).

[2]               Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Spain,
France, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom, as well as Norway,
Switzerland and Turkey

[3]               Non-profit making association under German law

[4]               Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions of 6.10.2010, “Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation
Union” COM(2010)546 final

[5]               Communication from the Commission of 3.3.2010,
“Europe 2020” A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth'
(COM(2010) 2020 final

[6]               COM(2011) 572 final Partnering
in Research and Innovation

[7]               COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 8 December
2011 18349/11 RECH

[8]               http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations/index\_en.cfm

[9]               SEC(2008) 2949 Impact
assessment report

[Top](#document1)