35 Amendments of Fredrick FEDERLEY related to 2016/2147(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Horizon 2020 (H2020) is the EU’s largest centrally managed R&DI programme, and the world's largest publicly funded R&I programme;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in negotiating H2020 and the current Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), Parliament asked for EUR100 billion euros rather than the EUR 7780 billion initially agreed and the budget seems very limited if H2020 is to fully explore excellence potential and to adequately respond to the societal challenges the European society is currently facing;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the report of the High Level Group on maximising impact of EU Research and Innovation Programmes and the interim evaluation planned for the 3rd quarter of 2017 will lay the foundations of the structure and content of FP9, on which a proposal will be published in the first half of 2018;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Framework Programme (FP) must be founded on European values, scientific independence, openness, diversity, high European ethical standards, social cohesionest scientific standards and equal access by citizens to the solutions and answers it provides;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the objective of Horizon 2020 is to contribute to building a society and an economy based on knowledge and innovation by leveraging additional national public and private R&D funding and by helping to attain the target of 3% of GDP for R&D by 2020; regrets that the EU invested only 2.03% of GDP in 2015, with the individual figures for different countries ranging from 0.46% to 3.26%, while major global competitors are outperforming the EU on R&D expenditure14 ; _________________ 14 ‘Horizon 2020, the EU framework programme for research and innovation. European Implementation Assessment’. European Parliament Research Service.
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the evaluation of FP7 and monitoring of H2020 shows that the EU FP for research and innovation is a huge success15 and has clear added value to the EU; _________________ 15 With over 130 000 proposals received, 9 000 grants signed, 50 000 participations and EUR 15.9 billion of EU funding.
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Understands that the FP intends to incentivise industry participation in order to increase R&D spending by industry16 ; regretNotes that industries have not increased their share ofy already accounts for two-thirds of total R&D spending; asks the Commission to assess the added value of funding for industry-driven instruments such as Joint Technology Initiatives (JTIs), which account for a large10% share of the Horizon 2020 budget17 ,; andsks the Commission to further enhance the coherence and transparency of all joint initiatives18 ; _________________ 16 Two-thirds of the 3% of GDP for R&D should come from industry. 17 In total, the 7 JTIs account for more than EUR 7 billion of the H2020 funds, ca. 10% of the whole H2020 budget and more than 13% of the actual available funding for H2020 calls (ca. EUR 8 billion/year over 7 years). 18 See Council conclusions of 29 May 2015.
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the programme budget, management and implementation is spread over 20 different bodies; queries whether this results in excessive coordination efforts, administrative complexity and redundancy; askscalls on the Commission to reflect on how towork towards simplifying this;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that Pillars 2 and 3 are toomore focused on higher Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), which limits the future absorption of disruptive innovations that are still in the pipeline of research projects with lower TRLs; consider; acknowledges that TRLs exclude non-technological forms of innovation generated by fundamental or applied research, particularly from SSH;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to offer a balanced mix of small, medium and large- sized projects; notes that the average budget for projects has increased under H2020 and that larger projects; Stresses that projects with a high number of participants are more demanding regarding project management and require participants with large financial and staff capabilities; notes that this is perceived as favoursing large institutions, and creating a problem for smaller Member States and for small participants from larger Member States; regrets thatcalls on the Commission to assess whether this poses obstacles for newcomers and concentrates funding in eliteleading institutions;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the current low success rate of less than 14 % represents a negative trend compared to FP7; regrets that the cuts inflicted by EFSI have deepened this problem;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Insists that research can be a risky investment for private investors and that funding research practice through grants is a necessity, in particular in areas with only limited market incentives for the private sector; regrets the tendency, in some cases, to move away from grants towards the use of loans; recognises that loans must be available for high TRL, close to market activities, within other types of instruments (e.g. EIB schemes) outside of the FP;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that several Member States are not respecting their national R&D investment commitments; calls for the earmarking of Structural Funds for R&D activities, especially investments in capacity building, and infrastructure and salaries, asks that the 3% of GDP target be met, and hopes that this can be raised to 4%the level of our largest global competitors in the not too distant future;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Confirms that ‘excellence’ should remain the key criterion across the three pillars, while noting that it is only one of the three evaluation criteria, alongside ‘impact’ and ‘quality and efficiency of the implementation’; calls for the reweightingcontinuation of these criteria and invites the Commission to set out additional sub- criteria by adding ‘SSH integration and geographical balance’ under ‘impact’ and ‘project size’ under ‘efficiency of the implementation’find alternative ways to ensure SSH integration and geographical balance, for instance through capacity building and better synergies with other EU funding programmes;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Call on the Commission to better define ‘impact’; stresses that the assessment of the impact of fundamental research projects should remain flexible and its relative weight in the evaluation procedure should be decreased; asks the Commission to check that the balance between bottom-up and top-down calls is maintained and to analyse which procedure (one or two stage) is more useful to avoid oversubscription;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to continue to enhance the societal challenges approach and emphasises the importance of collaborative research; underlines the need to reinforce some societal challenges, in particular fighting antimicrobial resistance, and challenges that play an important role in fighting climate change, such as innovation in sustainable agriculture and health, especially cancer and antimicrobial resistance research planforestry, marine research, bioeconomy, clean energy, green transport, resource efficiency, raw materials, and low carbon industrial processes;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that synergies between funds are crucial to make investments more effective; stresses that RIS3 are an important tool to catalyse synergies setting out national and regional frameworks for R&D&I investments; calls on the Commission to earmark part of ESIF for RIS3 synergies with Horizon 2020; calls on the Commission to prohibit Member States to impose stricter requirements for spending ESIF budgets than the European rules itself; calls on the Member States to renounce the introduction of stricter requirements for spending ESIF budgets than the European rules; regrets the presence of substantial barriers to making synergies fully operational19 such as the State Aid rules; calls on the Commission to revise the State Aid rules and to allow R&D structural fund projects to be justifiable within the FP rules of procedure while at the same time guaranteeing transparent procedures; _________________ 19 Large research infrastructure fits within the scope and goals of the ERDF, but ERDF funds allocated nationally cannot be used to co-finance it; construction costs associated with new research infrastructures are eligible under the ERDF, but operational and staff costs are not.
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that the R&I capabilities of North/South and West/East Member States are very different; recognises the European dimension to the problem of the participation gap, which must be addressed by the FPoth at EU and national level, including through ESIF, if the EU is to exploit its full potential; welcomes, in this respect, the Widening Programme; calls on the Commission to assess whether the three Widening instruments have achieved their specific objectives and to clarify the rational and general goal of the Programme, to review the indicator used to define ‘underrepresented’ countries, and to keep a dynamic list that allows Member States to be in or out depending on how their capabilities evolve; calls on the Commission and Member States to adapt or adopt new measures with ESIF to bridge this gap;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that the R&I capabilities of North/South and West/East Member States are very different; recognises the European dimension to the problem of the participation gap, which must be addressed by the FPoth at EU and national level, including through the ESI Funds, if the EU is to exploit its full potential; welcomes, in this respect, the Widening Programme; calls on the Commission to assess whether the three Widening instruments have achieved their specific objectives and to clarify the rational and general goal of the Programme, to review the indicator used to define ‘underrepresented’ countries, and to keep a dynamic list that allows Member States to be in or out depending on how their capabilities evolve; calls on the Commission and Member States to adapt or adopt new measures to bridge this gap;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recognises the importance of incorporating STEM, research and entrepreneurship skills into Member States’ primary and high schoo, secondary and tertiary level education systems in order to encourage young people to develop these skills, as R&D should be viewed in structural rather than cyclical or temporal terms; calls on the Member States and the Commission to enhance employment stability for young researchers; calls on the Commission to provide new increased levels of support for young researchers, such as a new funding scheme for early-stage researchers with less than three years of experience after PhD completion;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Confirms that international co- operparticipation fell from 5% in FP7 to 2.8% in Horizon 2020; recalls that the FP should contribute to ensuring that Europe remains a key global player, while underlining the importance of scientific diplomacy; calls for a strategic vision and structure to support this objective and welcomes initiatives such as PRIMA;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls that SSH integration means SSH research in interdisciplinary projects and not an ex-post add-on to otherwise technological projects, and that the most pressing problems faced by the EU require methodological research that is more conceptually focused on SSH; calls on the Commission either to introduce a minimum percentage dedicated to SSH funding, or to create an evaluation sub- criterion that takes account of its inclusion in projects;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines that Horizon 2020 is not focused on the ‘valley of death’ that constitutes the main barrier to converting prototypes into mass production, and that H2020 is the first FP to put research and innovation together; welcomes the creation of an EIC20 , but insists that this should not lead again to the separation of research from innovation or to a further fragmentation of funding; _________________ 20 Commission Communication entitled ‘Europe’s next leaders: the Start-up and Scale-up Initiative’ (COM/2016/0733).
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission to clarify the instruments and functioning of the EIC; underlines the need to keep and strengthen the SME Instrument and the Fast Track to Innovation, and to facilitate funding for the final stages of research so that laboratory scientific innovations can develop into commercial businesses; asks the Commission to analyse also how KICs can be integrated into the EIC; asks the Commission to design a framework for venture capital investments as part of the EIC to encourage venture capital investments in Europe;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes initiatives which bring the private and public sectors together to stimulate research; regrets the lowStresses the need for sufficient transparency and a fair level of public return on public investment in some sensitive areas such as health; highlights the need for enhanced EU leadership in prioritising public research needs and a fair public return; calls on the Commission to study the possibilities of co-ownership of IP for key projects funded by FP public granfurther explore mechanisms to for the sustainable exploitation of key projects funded by FP public grants, combining a fair level of return and sufficient industry incentives to participate in these projects;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the fact that Open Access to publications is now a general principle under Horizon 2020; highlights that the number of publications linked to projects up to December 201621 shows that new policies on enforcing the free sharing of data and ideasscholarly knowledge are required in order to make all scientific dataresearch results produced by future projects available by default, as the 100% objective is still a distant goal; _________________ 21 OpenAIRE report: In H2020, 2017 (19%) out of a total number of 10684 projects have ended and 8667 are ongoing. OpenAIRE has identified 6133 publications linked to 1375 H2020 projects.
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Welcomes the Open Science pilot fundingResearch Data Pilot as a first step towards an Open Science Cloud; recognises the relevance and potential of e-infrastructures and supercomputing, the need for public and private sector stakeholders and civil society to be involved and the importance of citizen science in ensuring that society plays a more active part in the definition and uptake of the problems and co- creation of the solution; calls for a scientific metadata structure and procedures for the generation of such data in order to feed the European OSC and ensure data exploitation; calls on the Commission and the public and private research community to explore new models that integrate private cloud and networking resources and public e-infrastructures and the launch of citizen agendas in science and innovation;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the success of H2020 and the 1:11 leverage factor; notes the oversubscription and the challenges that lie ahead, and calls for a budgetary increase tof EUR 100 billion for FP9;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the current pillar structure of the programme, and calls on the Commission to retain this structure for the sake of continuity and predictability, to improve the interaction among all funding instruments/programmes and to study the possibility of having fewer instruments with harmonised rules; asks the Commission therefore to continue work on the coherence, simplification, transparency and clarity of the programme, on improving the evaluation process and on, reducing fragmentation, duplication, and avoiding unnecessary administrative burden;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to look for a solution to the research deficiencies facing convergence regions in some Member States, in application of the principle of additionality; regrets that financial allocations from the Structural and Investment Funds can lead to a reduction in national R&D expenditure in regions where they apply, but insists that these must be additional to national public expenditure; calls also on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that investment in R&D is not accounted for as investment in relation to deficit objectivR&I programmes are seen as investments rather than purely funding programmes;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Underlines the need for more synergies with Structural Funds to build new higher excellence centres and regions and the importance of continuing to develop the ERA; calls for policies to remove barriers such as lower salaries that are faced by Eastern and Southern countries in order to avoid brain drain, and for the excellence of the project to be prioritised over the excellence of ‘elite’leading science centres;
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Notes that R&D investment by industry has not significantly increased; iIn view of the generally scarce resources for public R&D spending, calls for industrial competitiveness to be supported by differentiating between mature and emerginstruments tailored to each sector's specificities and ing sectors, thus allowing larger or more mature industries to participate in projecuch a way as to have the largest impact; calls on the Commission to monitor the in kind contributions to make sure investments moare at their own cost or through loannew investments;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. RegretNotes the mixed set of results achieved by the gender equality focus in H2020, as the only target reached is the share of women in the advisory groups, while the share of women in the project evaluation panels and among project coordinators, and the gender dimension in research and innovation content, remain below target levels; encourages Member States to create a gender-positiveneutral legal and political environment and to provide incentives for change, and calls on the Commission to continue to promote gender equality and gender mainstreaming in FP9 and to consider the possibility of gender as a sub- criterion in the evaluation phase;
Amendment 368 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Notes that the next FP will be critical for the EU's economic competitiveness and for its societal progress; notes that it will have to take account of the UK’s departure from the EU; notes that R&I benefits from clear and stable long-term frameworks, and that the UK has a leading position in the field of science; expresses the wish that networks and collaboration with entities in the UK can continue and that stable and satisfying solutions can be found quickly whilst taking into account that after its departure the UK will be a third country and have conditions attached to its participation;