Public Consultation on 12 proposed Institutionalised European Partnerships under the future Horizon Europe Research and Innovation programme (bijlage bij 22112,nr.2841) - Hoofdinhoud

Officiële titel	Public Consultation on 12 proposed Institutionalised European Partnerships under the future Horizon Europe Research and Innovation programme (bijlage bij 22112,nr.2841)
Document­datum	21-01-2020
Publicatie­datum	22-01-2020
Nummer	2020D01871
Kenmerk	22112, nr. 2841
Externe link	origineel bericht
Originele document in PDF

Contribution ID: 50fa9b0b-ef3c-44a3-b388-e3feadb6e9cb

Date: 05/11/2019 16:39:03

Public Consultation on 12 proposed Institutionalised European Partnerships under the future Horizon Europe i Research and Innovation programme

Fields marked with * are mandatory.

Introduction

With a proposed budget of nearly 100 billion euro from 2021 to 2027, the Horizon Europe i framework

programme represents the largest collaborative multinational research and innovation investment in Europe

and is open to participants worldwide.

The European Parliament and the Council have provisionally agreed on the Horizon Europe i legislative

package (COM(2018)435)[1]. Based on the agreement, Horizon Europe i promotes a more strategic,

ambitious and impact-oriented approach to public-public and public-private partnerships (European

Partnerships), ensuring that they can effectively contribute to the Union’s policies and priorities.

European Partnerships allow to bring together a broad range of actors to work towards a common goal,

develop synergies with EU, national and regional programmes and strategies, and accelerate societal and

market uptake. Different forms of European Partnerships can be implemented depending on specific

needs, type of activities and criteria: Co-funded, Co-programmed or Institutionalised European Partnerships.

Institutionalised Partnerships are implemented only when other parts of the Horizon Europe i programme,

including other forms of European Partnerships (Co-funded or Co-programmed), cannot achieve the

objectives or generate the necessary expected impacts. The preparation of such Institutionalised

Partnerships requires new EU legislation and the setting up of specific legal structures (funding bodies)

based on Article 185 and 187 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU)[2]. As such all

Institutionalised Partnerships must be justified with an impact assessment prior to the preparation of the

legislative proposals.

The European Commission is currently running the impact assessment of 12 candidate Institutionalised

European Partnerships in the following priorities:

• 1. 

  EU-Africa research partnership on health security to tackle infectious diseases (Global Health)

• 2. 

  Innovative Health Initiative

• 3. 

  Key Digital Technologies

• 4. 

  Smart Networks and Services

• 5. 

  European Metrology

• 6. 

  Transforming Europe's rail system 7. Integrated Air Traffic Management

• 8. 

  Clean Aviation

• 9. 

  Clean Hydrogen

• 10. 

  Safe and Automated Road Transport

• 11. 

  Circular bio-based Europe: sustainable innovation for new local value from waste and biomass

• 12. 

  Innovative SMEs

This public consultation aims to collect the views of stakeholders and citizens on the need for such

Institutionalised European Partnerships and will feed into the impact assessment process. This consultation

is structured in two parts: Part 1 covering all candidate Institutionalised European Partnerships and Part 2

specific to each candidate. We invite you to provide feedback on any of the candidate Institutionalised

European Partnership.

The questionnaire is available in English, French and German and you can reply in any EU language. You

can pause any time and continue later. Your contribution is downloadable once you have submitted your

answers.

Responses received after the closing date will not be considered. Questionnaires sent by e-mail or on

paper will not be analysed except those due to accessibility needs of people with visual disabilities and their

representative organisations.

A summary on the outcome of the public consultation will be published by the Commission services on the ‘

Have your say’ portal .

We thank you for your participation.

Protection of personal data

Privacy statement on the protection of personal data in EU Survey

[1] Legal texts for Horizon Europe i to be found here: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/research

href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/research-and-innovation-including-horizon-europe-iter-and-euratom-legal-texts-and-factsheets_en">and-innovation-including-horizon-europe-iter-and-euratom-legal-texts-and-factsheets_en

[2] Following Article 8(1)(c) of the proposed Regulation for Horizon Europe i

About you

• * 

  Language of my contribution

  Bulgarian Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Finnish French Gaelic German

  Greek Greek Hungarian Italian Latvian Lithuanian Maltese Polish Portuguese Romanian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swedish

• * 

  I am giving my contribution as

  Academic/research institution Business association Company/business organisation Consumer organisation EU citizen Environmental organisation Non-EU citizen Non-governmental organisation (NGO) Public authority Trade union Other

• * 

  First name

  Frans

• * 

  Surname

  Verkaart

• * 

  Email (this won't be published)

  f.t.m.verkaart@minez.nl

• * 

  Scope

  International Local National Regional

• * 

  Organisation name

255 character(s) maximum Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy

• * 

  Organisation size

  Micro (1 to 9 employees) Small (10 to 49 employees) Medium (50 to 249 employees) Large (250 or more)

Transparency register number

255 character(s) maximum

Check if your organisation is on the transparency register . It's a voluntary database for organisations seeking to influence EU decisionmaking.

• * 

  Country of origin

Please add your country of origin, or that of your organisation.

Afghanistan Djibouti Libya Saint Martin Åland Islands Dominica Liechtenstein Saint Pierre and Miquelon Albania Dominican Lithuania Saint Vincent Republic and the Grenadines Algeria Ecuador Luxembourg Samoa American Egypt Macau San Marino Samoa Andorra El Salvador Madagascar São Tomé and Príncipe Angola Equatorial Malawi Saudi Arabia Guinea Anguilla Eritrea Malaysia Senegal Antarctica Estonia Maldives Serbia Antigua and Eswatini Mali Seychelles Barbuda Argentina Ethiopia Malta Sierra Leone Armenia Falkland Islands Marshall Singapore Islands Aruba Faroe Islands Martinique Sint Maarten Australia Fiji Mauritania Slovakia Austria Finland Mauritius Slovenia Azerbaijan France Mayotte Solomon Islands Bahamas French Guiana Mexico Somalia Bahrain French Micronesia South Africa Polynesia

Bangladesh French Moldova South Georgia Bangladesh French Moldova South Georgia

Southern and and the South Antarctic Lands Sandwich Islands

Barbados Gabon Monaco South Korea

Belarus Georgia Mongolia South Sudan Belgium Germany Montenegro Spain

Belize Ghana Montserrat Sri Lanka

Benin Gibraltar Morocco Sudan

Bermuda Greece Mozambique Suriname

Bhutan Greenland Myanmar Svalbard and /Burma Jan Mayen

Bolivia Grenada Namibia Sweden

Bonaire Saint Guadeloupe Nauru Switzerland

Eustatius and

Saba

Bosnia and Guam Nepal Syria

Herzegovina

Botswana Guatemala Netherlands Taiwan

Bouvet Island Guernsey New Caledonia Tajikistan

Brazil Guinea New Zealand Tanzania

British Indian Guinea-Bissau Nicaragua Thailand

Ocean Territory

British Virgin Guyana Niger The Gambia

Islands

Brunei Haiti Nigeria Timor-Leste

Bulgaria Heard Island Niue Togo and McDonald

Islands Burkina Faso Honduras Norfolk Island Tokelau Burundi Hong Kong Northern Tonga

Mariana Islands Cambodia Hungary North Korea Trinidad and

Tobago

Cameroon Iceland North Tunisia

Macedonia Canada India Norway Turkey Cape Verde Indonesia Oman Turkmenistan Cayman Islands Iran Pakistan Turks and

Caicos Islands Central African Iraq Palau Tuvalu

Republic

Chad Ireland Palestine Uganda

Chile Isle of Man Panama Ukraine

China Israel Papua New United Arab

Guinea Emirates Christmas Italy Paraguay United

Island Kingdom

Clipperton Jamaica Peru United States Clipperton Jamaica Peru United States Cocos (Keeling) Japan Philippines United States Islands Minor Outlying Islands Colombia Jersey Pitcairn Islands Uruguay Comoros Jordan Poland US Virgin Islands Congo Kazakhstan Portugal Uzbekistan Cook Islands Kenya Puerto Rico Vanuatu Costa Rica Kiribati Qatar Vatican City Côte d’Ivoire Kosovo Réunion Venezuela Croatia Kuwait Romania Vietnam Cuba Kyrgyzstan Russia Wallis and Futuna Curaçao Laos Rwanda Western Sahara Cyprus Latvia Saint Yemen Barthélemy Czechia Lebanon Saint Helena Zambia Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Democratic Lesotho Saint Kitts and Zimbabwe Republic of the Nevis Congo Denmark Liberia Saint Lucia

• * 

  Publication privacy settings

The Commission will publish the responses to this public consultation. You can choose whether you would like your details to be made

public or to remain anonymous.

Anonymous Only your type of respondent, country of origin and contribution will be published. All other personal details (name, organisation name and size, transparency register number) will not be published. Public Your personal details (name, organisation name and size, transparency register number, country of origin) will be published with your contribution.

I agree with the personal data protection provisions

Part 1: General questions on European Partnerships

As per the political agreement on Horizon Europe i, an Institutionalised European Partnership shall

be implemented only where other parts of the Horizon Europe i programme, including other forms of

European Partnerships (co-programmed, co-funded), would not achieve the objectives or would not

generate the necessary expected impacts; they should be justified by a long-term perspective and

high degree of integration.

There will be three types of European Partnerships under Horizon Europe i [1].

Co-programmed European Partnerships are based on memoranda of understanding and/or contractual

arrangements between the Commission and private and/or public partners. They are expected to be best

suited to partnerships involving industry, but also Member States, foundations, international partners etc.

They are jointly implemented by the Commission (Union contribution via Horizon Europe i work

programmes) and partners (contributions under their responsibility), with full application of Horizon Europe i

rules for the Union contribution, whereas partners rules apply to their contributions. They allow for more

flexibility over time as regards the composition of partners, objectives and activities and require the

relatively lowest effort for set-up and implementation compared to the other forms of European Partnerships.

Co-funded European Partnerships are implemented under the responsibility of the partners, that receive

a substantial budget contribution from Horizon Europe i (Grant Agreement) to cofound their joint programme

of activities. They are expected to be best suited to partnerships involving Member States, with research

funders and other public authorities at the core of the consortium, and possibility to include foundations and

international partners etc. By default national rules apply to calls launched by the consortium. They require

a relatively moderate effort for their set-up and implementation compared to other forms of European

Partnerships.

Institutionalised European Partnerships are based on the Union participation in and financial

contribution to research and innovation programmes undertaken by several Member States (under Article

185 TFEU) or by bodies established under Article 187 TFEU, for partnerships involving typically industry,

research organisations but also Member States, foundations and international partners. They are expected

to be best suited for long-term collaborations with stable partners and provide only limited flexibility for

adaptation during their implementation. Compared to other forms of European Partnerships, they require a

relatively high and long-term effort for their preparation and set-up, including the establishment of dedicated

entities (funding bodies) for their implementation. By default the rules for participation of Horizon Europe i

apply for the calls launched under Institutionalised European Partnerships.

[1] Article 8 of COM(2018)435

• * 

  1. Have you been involved in the on-going research and innovation framework programme Horizon 2020 or the preceeding Framework Programme 7?

  Yes No

• * 

  Please identify in which capacity (multiple answers possible):

  Applied for funding Received funding Expert (evaluator, reviewer, etc.) Participated in governance (programme committee, etc.) Other Participated in governance (programme committee, etc.) Other

• * 

  Are or were you directly involved in a partnership under Horizon 2020 or its predecessor Framework Programme 7?

  Yes No

• * 

  Please identify your role in the partnership (select all that apply):

  Partner/Member/Beneficiary in a partnership Representative in the governance of a partnership Member of a committee for a partnership Expert (evaluator, reviewer) in calls for proposals in partnership Applied for funding under a partnership Provided national cofinancing to a partnership Other

• * 

  Please identify the partnership (select all that apply):

  European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP2) Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 (IMI2) Joint Undertaking Electronic Components and Systems for European Leadership (ECSEL) Joint Undertaking 5G (5G PPP) European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research (EMPIR) Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking Single European Sky Air Traffic Management Research (SESAR) Joint Undertaking Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 (FCH2) Joint Undertaking Bio-Based Industries Joint Undertaking Eurostars-2 (supporting research-performing small and medium-sized enterprises) Ambient Assisted Living (AAL 2)

  Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA)

  European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC)

• 2. 

  To what extent do you think that the future European Partnerships under Horizon

Europe need to:

1 (Not

needed 2 3 4 5 (Fully Don't needed) Know

at all)

• * 

  Be more responsive towards EU policy objectives

• * 

  Be more responsive towards societal needs * Be more responsive towards priorities in national

and regional research and innovation strategies,

including smart specialisation strategies

• * 

  Make a significant contribution to achieving the UN’

s Sustainable Development Goals

• * 

  Make significant contribution to the EU efforts to

achieve climate-related goals

• * 

  Focus more on the development and effective

deployment of technology

• * 

  Focus more on bringing about transformative

change towards sustainability in their respective area

• * 

  Make a significant contribution to EU global

competitiveness in specific sectors/domains

• * 

  Other

• * 

  (Other) Please specify:

500 character(s) maximum

In general, partnerships should look beyond their own discipline, incorporating (where possible) relevant

social sciences and humanities, technical and medical sciences. The above mentioned statements are

difficult to interpret when we speak about a broad range of partnerships which on itself apply to different

goals of Horizon Europe i. There is no one size fits all approach based on some of these statements, while question two does imply a one size fits all approach.

• * 

  3. What would you see as main advantages and disadvantages of participation in an Institutionalised European Partnership (as a partner) under Horizon Europe i?

500 character(s) maximum

The Netherlands strongly supports public-private partnerships, in specific for Eurostars. An Institutional

Partnership is an important basis to aquire long term political and financial commitment from Member States.

The multi-year international strategic cooperation of National Funding Agencies has resulted in a European

wide ecosystem which made it possible to connect and assist SMEs faster, more intensively and more successfully.

• 4. 

  For which of the candidate Institutionalised European Partnership(s) would you

like to specifically provide your views through this consultation (you may provide

your views for more than one)?

EU-Africa research partnership on health security to tackle infectious

diseases - Global Health

Innovative Health Initiative

Key Digital Technologies

Smart Networks and Services

European Metrology

Transforming Europe's rail system

Integrated Air Traffic Management

Clean Aviation Clean Aviation Circular bio-based Europe: sustainable innovation for new local value from waste and biomass Clean Hydrogen Safe and Automated Road Transport Innovative SMEs

Part 2 - Questions on problems, objectives, policy options and impact

tailored to each candidate European Partnership

The following questions allow to assess the necessity of a partnership approach, as well as the

need for an Institutionalised Partnership for each candidate partnership.

Innovative Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

The European Commission is assessing whether to propose an Institutionalised European Partnership on

innovative small and medium-sized enterprises. The overall objective of the proposed initiative is to support fast-growing and innovative SMEs to develop new products, processes and services that help to improve

the daily lives of people and boost European competitiveness. It will do so by funding market-led, crossborder,

collaborative research and innovation as well as accompanying measures supporting market

uptake.

The proposed partnership would build on the experience gained in the existing Eurostars2 Programme but

would significantly revise its scope and expand its partners and take into account the strengthened

scientific, societal, economic and technological impact criteria of Horizon Europe i.

The Eurostars2 Programme, established in 2014 under Horizon 2020 (as an Article 185 TFEU initiative),

supports international cooperation between SMEs, with 36 participating countries from Europe and

worldwide. This was preceded by Eurostars Joint Programme (2008-2013) under FP7.

The inception impact assessment outlines an early description of the problems, objectives, options and

likely impact of a candidate European Partnership in this field.

• 1. 

  To what extent do you think this is relevant for research and innovation efforts at EU level to address the

following problems in relation to innovative small and medium-sized enterprises?

Research and innovation problems:

1 (Not

relevant 2 3 4 5 (Very Don't at all) relevant) Know

Lack of understanding of or knowledge about scaling small and medium sized enterprises

Innovation gap in the EU in scaling small and medium-sized enterprises

Structural and resource problems:

1 (Not

relevant 2 3 4 5 (Very Don't at all) relevant) Know

Limited collaboration and pooling of resources between public actors and private actors i.e.

businesses, private investors

Problems in uptake of innovative solutions from small and medium sized

enterprises due to:

1 (Not

relevant 2 3 4 5 (Very Don't at all) relevant) Know

Market size (national markets)

Regulatory barriers in the field of investments

Barriers to exploitation due to lack of access to national and international markets

Lack of consideration of societal or user needs when supporting small and medium-sized enterprises

Insufficient digitalisation (data access and analysis, interoperability)

Concerns with use of digital tools for privacy or security reasons

• 2. 

  In your view, how should the specific challenges described above be addressed through Horizon Europe i intervention?

European Partnerships may take any of the following forms:

• a) 

  Co-programmed European Partnerships: based on memoranda of understanding and/or contractual arrangements between the

Commission and private and/or public partners;

• b) 

  Co-funded European Partnerships: based on participation in and financial contribution to a programme of R&I activities, using a

Programme co-fund action; or

• c) 

  Institutionalised European Partnerships: based on participation in and financial contribution to R&I programmes undertaken by

several Member States (under Article 185 TFEU) or by bodies established under Article 187 TFEU (Institutionalised European Partnerships)

Traditional calls under Horizon Europe i work programmes Co-Funded partnership Co-Programmed partnership

Institutionalised Partnership Institutionalised Partnership

• * 

  Please explain briefly your choice:

500 character(s) maximum

The described challenges are very different from each other and would require different policy interventions. The Netherlands wants to continue with Eurostars-3 in the form of an Institutional Partnership for reasons of

political visibility and legal certainty.

• 3. 

  In your view, how relevant are the following elements and activities to ensure that the proposed

European Partnership would meet its objectives?

Setting joint long-term agenda with strong involvement of:

1 (Not

relevant) 2 3 4

5 (Very Don’t relevant) Know

Member States and Associated Countries

Industry

Academia

Foundations and Non-Governmental Organisations

Other societal stakeholders

Pooling and leveraging resources (financial, infrastructure, in-kind expertise

etc.) through coordination, alignment or integration with:

1 (Not Don’t

relevant) 2 3 4

5 (Very relevant) Know

Member States and Associated Countries

Industry

Academia

Foundations and Non-Governmental Organisations

Other societal stakeholders

Partnership composition:

1 (Not 5 (Very Don’

relevant) 2 3 4 relevant) t Know

Flexibility in the composition of partners over time Involvement of a broad range of partners, including across disciplines and sectors (such as

academia, research performing organisations, Member States representatives…)

Implementing the following activities:

1 (Not 5 (Very Don’t

relevant) 2 3 4 relevant) Know

Joint R&I programme

Collaborative R&I projects

Deployment and piloting activities

Input to regulatory aspects

Co-creation of solutions with endusers

• 4. 

  In your view, how relevant is to set up a specific legal structure (funding body) for

the candidate European Partnership to achieve the following?

1 (Not Don’

relevant at 2 3 4 5 (Very t

all) relevant) know

Implement its activities more effectively

Implement activities faster to respond to

sudden market or policy needs

Implements activities more transparently

Increase financial leverage

Ensure better links to regulators

Ensure better links to practitioners on the ground

Obtain more buy-in and long-term commitment from other partners

Ensure harmonisation of standards and approaches

Facilitate synergies with other EU and national programmes

Facilitate collaboration with other relevant European Partnerships

• 5. 

  What is your view on the scope and coverage proposed for this candidate

institutionalised European Partnership, based on its inception impact assessment?

Too narrow Right scope & coverage Too broad Don't know

Technologies covered

Research areas covered

Geographical coverage

Types of partners covered

Range of activities covered

Sectoral coverage

Please provide any comment you may have on the proposed scope and coverage for this candidate Institutionalised Partnership:

A dedicated implementation structure is needed to coordinate the national policies and activities to implement Eurostars-3. It is however of great value to Eurostars that the National Funding Agencies are the

primary relation to SMEs. That means that diversity and decentral implementation is of great importance as well. To Ensure the maximum financial commitment from Member states, countries should maintain the

possibility to deploy national instruments and budgets to fund their Eurostars-3 participants. This means that national (funding) rules should continue to be applicable. Central financial management with joint and

several liability is not an option for the Netherlands.

• 6. 

  In your view, would it be possible to rationalise the candidate European

Institutionalised Partnership and its activities, and/or to better link it with other comparable initiatives?

Yes No

(No) Please explain why other comparable initiatives are not suitable to be linked with?

500 character(s) maximum

It is not clear what it means to 'rationalise' an IP. The Netherlands supports linking Eurostars-3 with other

initiatives in the European Research and Innovation landscape through a joint Eureka-EC investment

readiness programme.

• 7. 

  In your view, how relevant is it for the candidate European Institutionalised Partnership to deliver on the following impacts?

Societal impact:

1 (Not Don’

relevant at 2 3 4 5 (Very

all) relevant)

t know New products, processes and services that help to improve the daily lives of people

Economic/technological impact:

1 (Not Don’

relevant 2 3 4 5 (Very

at all) relevant)

t know

Scale-up of innovative small and medium sized companies in the EU boosting European competitiveness

More appealing and creative jobs in Europe, requiring high-skills

Increased coherence, effectiveness and efficiency of national research and innovation ecosystems in support of innovative SMEs

Scientific impact:

1 (Not Don’

relevant 2 3 4 5 (Very t

at all) relevant) know

Widened participation in EU research and innovation funding to SMEs based in countries

with lower research, development and innovation intensity

New scientific knowledge and reinforcement of EU scientific capabilities

Contact

RTD-A2-SUPPORT@ec.europa.eu