2009/2243(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that research and innovation are crucial to addressing global challenges and that innovation is most effectively addressed at ~~region~~national, regional or local level;

Amendment 10 #

Anni PODIMATA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that the impact of these earmarked funds could be further improved through complementary use of, and better coordination between, regional, research and innovation policies, at both EU and regional and local level;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission – at the same time as working on strengthening synergies – to simplify the bureaucracy for the Framework Programmes for Research (FP7) and Innovation (CIP) in order to strengthen the effects of synergies with the Structural Funds;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Believes that further measures are needed to prepare the ground for effective trans-national cooperation, in particular the development of coherent regional or national strategies for achieving synergies;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Is convinced that commitment by the political leadership is both a necessary precondition for research and innovation policy coherence and a tool to enhance it;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Believes that establishing a strategic policy framework for research and innovation helps to ensure that individual policies are consistent with national goals and priorities for economic and social development;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Believes that implementation procedures and monitoring mechanisms should be designed to ensure that policies can be adjusted in the light of progress, new information and changing circumstances;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)

3e. Believes that an administrative culture that promotes cross-sectoral co-operation and continuous dialogue between different policy communities contributes to the strengthening of policy coherence;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)

3f. Given the fact that the implementing bodies of the EU instruments concerned exist on different levels (supranational, national and sub-national) and are governed by a different rationale (e.g. cohesion vs. excellence), believes that the guaranteeing of actual policy coherence constitutes a major challenge, especially ‘on the ground’ where EU instruments mix with national and regional policies;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes - while acknowledging that Community programmes such as SF, FP7 and CIP differ in their primary focus, mechanism and administration - that diverse rules, procedures and practices unnecessarily hinder effective implementation; calls for a more harmonised approach~~, better coordination and more exchange of information between the different programmes;~~ (to eligibility rules, standard unit costs, lump-sums, etc.), better coordination (of schedules of calls for proposals, themes and types of calls, etc.) and more exchange of information between the different programmes; sees a clear need for more expertise on the regional level regarding application for Community funding, administrative and financial procedures, fund management and financial engineering; in this respect, calls on the Commission to act as a facilitator and to provide joint guidance on Community funding opportunities through ex-ante guidance notes;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that research and innovation are crucial to addressing global challenges and that innovation ~~is most~~can be very effectively addressed at regional level;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Requests the European Commission to include an analysis of inter-relations with other instruments in the evaluation studies on either of the three instruments in order to be able to provide joint guidance;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Believes that realising potential synergies, eliminating gaps and avoiding overlaps of funding available from the three EU instruments (SF, FP7 and CIP) will depend on the effectiveness of ‘bottom-up’ strategic processes at regional and/or national level (depending on the size and degree of decentralisation of the Member States);

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Notes that actual synergies from the point of view of the direct beneficiary of funding depend on the beneficiary's organisational and strategic capacity to combine support from different EU instruments; calls on the regional actors to create regional strategies that can facilitate the combination of funding; requests the Commission therefore to evaluate the possibility of providing additional expert support through a ‘user manual’ as well as means to exchange good practices;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. While a limited number of regions have actual potential to benefit from synergies between the programmes, requests the Commission to strengthen regional level analysis of research and innovation potential and needs, notably by improving the statistical and qualitative data available;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on regional authorities to make better use of the SF to build up research, knowledge and innovation capacity in their regions, – paying particular attention to green innovations which will pave the way for the next industrial revolution – thus enabling them to take part in EU research and innovation activities; encourages regions to establish R&D priorities that are complementary with those of FP7;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on ~~region~~Member States and regional or local authorities to make better use of the SF to build up research, knowledge and innovation capacity in their regions, enabling them to take part in EU research and innovation activities; encourages ~~regions to establish R&D priorities that~~Member States and, where appropriate, regional or local authorities, to establish R&D priorities and where appropriate ensure that they are complementary with those of FP7;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on regional authorities to make better use of the SF to build up research, knowledge and innovation capacity in their regions, for instance by setting up research infrastructure, enabling them to take part in EU research and innovation activities; encourages regions to establish R&D priorities that are complementary with those of FP7;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Supports stronger collaboration between national FP7 contact points , managers of R&D programmes and regional innovation agencies, allowing different aspects or phases of research and innovation projects to be funded from different sources; recommends closer cooperation between the Enterprise Europe Network and the Structural Funds’ managing authorities and a closer link between the Lead- Market Initiative, Technology Platforms and regional technological roadmaps;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Supports stronger collaboration between national FP7 contact points, managers of R&D programmes and ~~regional~~ innovation agencies, allowing different aspects or phases of research and innovation projects to be funded from different sources;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Believes that regional innovation could benefit from a clear strategic approach that fosters regional partnerships between business, universities and research institutes in specific fields (cluster forming); in this respect, highlights the new Knowledge and Innovation Communities created in the framework of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, linking up leading European knowledge-intensive regional clusters;

Amendment 3 #

Anni PODIMATA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that research and innovation, in particular as regards the development of low or zero carbon emissions and energy savings, are of critical importance for addressing global challenges, such as climate change and security of energy supplies and also improving competitiveness at regional and local level;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that mixed financing is not allowed between Structural Funds and the Framework Programmes, and that this fact often prevents regions from using FP funding at the same time as SF funding; underlines that the instruments can only be combined to cover complementary but separate activities, which is often very difficult for the beneficiary;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on Member States to earmark more funding from the SF for research and innovation, strengthen research capacities, support innovative clusters – taking account of the sustainable management model in innovation – and develop and implement regional innovation strategies in collaboration with the private sector.

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on Member States to earmark more funding from the SF for research and innovation, strengthen research capacities, support innovative clusters and develop and implement ~~regional~~ innovation strategies in collaboration with the private sector.

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the upcoming Innovation Act will be drafted with a view to strengthening the synergies between the Structural Funds and the Framework Programmes for Research and Innovation (FP7, CIP);

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Believes that the main practical opportunities for synergies could derive from thematic complementarities between programmes with a strong ‘technology’ or ‘sectoral’ focus developed at European, national and regional levels;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Stresses that long-term planning is necessary on a regional level in order to achieve synergies, for instance by using one instrument (e.g. FP7) as a preparatory activity for a larger infrastructural investment (funded through the Structural Funds, for example);

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the Structural Funds regional operational programmes allocate sufficient resources to sustaining and further developing ‘regional research and innovation strategic frameworks';

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that the impact of these earmarked funds could be further improved through complementary use of, and better coordination between~~, regional,~~ research and innovation policies, at ~~both EU and region~~EU, national, regional and local level;

source: PE-439.282

2010/03/26 REGI 74 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the renewed Lisbon strategy gives high priority to research and innovation so as to respond to challenges such as climate change and increasing global competition; whereas in the post- crisis era stimulating growth and jobs ~~through research and innovation~~ has become ever more important, constituting a core target of the proposed EU 2020 Strategy,

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Welcomes that new financing methods exist and underlines the potential of the JEREMIE initiative and the Risk Sharing Finance Facility of the Commission and the European Investment Bank Group in boosting financing opportunities for innovative enterprises; recommends that regional actors exploit these new opportunities complementarily to Structural Funds financing; stresses in this context the need to effectively coordinate public and private investments;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the importance placed by the EU 2020 strategy on research and innovation with a view to the EU’s becoming an intelligent, sustainable and integrative economy with high levels of employment, productivity and economic, social and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses that investment in R&D, as also in innovation, education and resource-efficient technologies, will benefit traditional sectors and rural areas as much as it will high-skill service economies, and will therefore reinforce economic, social and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for an integrated multi-level governance approach to specific policies in the EU; stresses that a functional multi-level governance system is a precondition for ~~sett~~defining and ~~implementing earmarking objectives efficiently~~putting into practice efficiently the relationship between cohesion policy and support for R&D;

Amendment 14 #

Iosif MATULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for an integrated multi-level governance approach to specific policies in the EU; stresses that a functional multi-level governance system is a precondition for setting and implementing earmarking objectives efficiently; is aware of the administrative diversity existing at Member State level and believes it is important to identify the decision-making level which is most effective for the citizens;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for an integrated multi-level governance approach to specific policies in the EU; stresses that a functional multi-level governance system is a precondition for setting and implementing earmarking objectives efficiently; notes that the responsibility for the implementation of Structural Funds lies with national and regional authorities, while CIP and FP7 are centrally managed by the Commission;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers important to coordinate Community policies that play a role in achieving economic, social and territorial cohesion; stresses the need to further evaluate their impact on cohesion and to foster effective synergies;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the generation of positive synergies between the different EU instruments and policies necessitates a complex set of relations between the agents who produce, distribute, promote and implement different forms of knowledge;

Amendment 18 #

Oldřich VLASÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Highlights the great potential of cities in pursuing research and innovation; believes that smarter urban policy based on technological advancements would contribute to sustainable economic growth and hence calls for a more significant respect paid to cities and adjusting agglomerations in future cohesion policy as well as research and innovation policy;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that, ~~through the earmarking provisions for 2007-2013, cohesion policy is better geared to create synergies with research and innovation policie~~in its objectives, cohesion policy encourages the relationship between R&D and regional economic policy and thereby makes an essential contribution to innovative regions, and at the same time the territorial dimension has become increasingly important in FP7 and CIP; calls ~~for considerat~~on all regions to ~~be given to a tightened earmarking mechanism with a stronger thematic focus allowing for appropriate policy responses to the new challenges~~learn from the good examples set by innovative regions and to place greater thematic emphasis on R&D;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the implementation of research and innovation is a need shared by all strata of society and its purpose must be to improve people’s social and economic conditions;

Amendment 20 #

Karima DELLI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that, through the earmarking provisions for 2007-2013, cohesion policy is better geared to create synergies with research and innovation policies, ~~and at the same time~~but wishes the territorial dimension ~~has become increasingly important in FP7 and CIP~~to be taken more into account and given more funding in FP7 and CIP, with a view to ensuring that measures such as Europe Innova and ‘Regions of knowledge’ have a greater impact on regional research and innovation systems; calls for consideration to be given to a tightened earmarking mechanism with a stronger thematic focus allowing for appropriate policy responses to the new challenges;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that, through the earmarking provisions for 2007-2013, cohesion policy is better geared to create synergies with research and innovation policies, and at the same time the territorial dimension has become increasingly important in FP7 and CIP; calls for consideration to be given to a ~~tightened~~n earmarking ~~mechanism with~~and performance payments mechanism which is based on qualitative rather than quantitative criteria and has a stronger thematic focus allowing for appropriate policy responses to the new challenges;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that, through the earmarking provisions for 2007-2013, cohesion policy is better geared to create synergies with research and innovation policies, and at the same time the territorial dimension has become increasingly important in FP7 and CIP; calls ~~for consideration to be given to a tightened earmarking mechanism with a stronger thematic focus allowing for appropriate policy responses to the new challenges~~on the Commission to develop initiatives, in line with the concept of the European Research Area as embodied in the Treaty of Lisbon, to ensure that synergies are reinforced by the confluence of three basic conditions, namely: Integration, Involvement and Inclusion;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recalls, nonetheless, that as things stand spending on R+D+i under the framework programme is allocated on the basis of the excellence criterion, which, despite its unquestionable importance, entails in practice a more competitive mode of access for participants, thus limiting the generation of positive synergies in the group of regions and Member States which are going in the right direction but have not yet attained the goal;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Regrets~~Insists that effective innovation depends on the closeness of the synergies obtained, and regrets the fact that existing opportunities for synergies in funding are still not well known; calls on the regions ~~and~~, which are the main agents as regards information and capacity for analysis, management and decision-making, as well as on the Member States, to step up efforts to improve communication;

Amendment 25 #

Franz OBERMAYR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that existing opportunities for synergies in funding are still not well known; ~~calls on~~should oblige regions and Member States to step up efforts to improve communication;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Regrets that existing opportunities for synergies in funding are still not well known; calls on regions and Member States to step up efforts to improve communication; stresses that the different national, regional and local bodies managing FP7, CIP and the Structural Funds have to be aware of the possibilities offered by each of these instruments; calls for better collaboration between all actors involved on regional, national and European level;

Amendment 27 #

Georgios STAVRAKAKIS, Francesco DE ANGELIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines that interventions targeting research and innovation should capitalise on regional assets and capacities and form part of a regional innovation strategy based on smart innovation; considers that such strategies require an enhanced role of regions and cities in the EU and national priority setting and implementation; calls therefore for considering the possibility of re-establishing innovative actions within the Structural Funds with a view to promote regional innovation strategies;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines the fact that the beneficiaries’ access to projects in the field of research and innovation requires high technical capacity and strong knowledge of administrative and financial procedures and, therefore, this access is extremely difficult for small size potential beneficiaries· as a result we observe a high spatial concentration of innovative activities in economic clusters and top EU regions· points out that the increase of regional disparities in terms of research and innovation potential is a challenge which has to be addressed not only in the framework of cohesion policy but through research and innovation policy itself;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Underlines that synergy is especially efficient in capacity building; refers in this context to the project financing management in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) and the need to coordinate EU innovation funding priorities on regional and national level;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas European support for research and innovation is primarily provided through research, innovation and cohesion policy, the ~~main~~primary instruments of these being ~~the Structural Funds,~~ the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) and which are supported to a significant degree by the Structural Funds,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses the need to promote and apply successful models in the knowledge triangle, in the relations between enterprises, research centres, universities and public authorities; highlights the potential of regional clusters in mobilising regional competitiveness and welcomes the inclusion of cluster development in both CIP and FP7 (Regions of Knowledge action in FP7); highlights, in this connection, the new Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) established within the framework of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), linking up leading European knowledge-intensive regional clusters; notes that knowledge exchange in regional clusters can also be facilitated by structural funds;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses the need to promote and apply successful models in the knowledge triangle, in the relations between enterprises, research centres, universities and public authorities; highlights the potential of regional clusters in mobilising regional competitiveness and welcomes the inclusion of cluster development in both CIP and FP7 (Regions of Knowledge action in FP7); notes that knowledge exchange in regional clusters can also be facilitated by structural funds; emphasises that such clusters represent a major opportunity for disadvantaged regions in particular;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights the importance of analysing, sharing and integrating best practices concerning synergies between the policy instruments; in this context welcomes the efforts made by the Commission to improve inter-departmental cooperation and calls on it to step up regional-level analysis of research and innovation potential and needs, in particular as regards the collection of available qualitative data;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes with satisfaction the Practical Guide to EU funding opportunities for research and innovation; recommends that in future such guidance notes be provided immediately after the legislative frameworks come into effect; awaits the Commission Staff Working Document containing examples of synergies in practice; recommends that the Commission draw up guidance notes for the practical management and administration of research and innovation projects, with an intermediate phase for reorientation and self-evaluation with a view to achieving the intended results.

Amendment 34 #

Michael THEURER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on the Commission to carry out a study on how applying for support under the various programmes can be made easier using computer programs with standardised manuals;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Encourages the Commission to continue its activities aimed at fostering synergy, and to keep the European Parliament informed on their evolution, particularly on the situation of vertical cooperation between the EU and national and regional entities; urges the Commission to include a qualitative analysis of inter-relations with other instruments in the evaluation studies on each of the three instruments, in order to be able to provide joint general guidance;

Amendment 36 #

Oldřich VLASÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Welcomes the emphasis in the draft EU 2020 strategy on the interdependence between policies, the importance of policy integration and the need for better synergies and stronger partnership in the design and delivery of public policies; calls for consideration to be given to the need expressed by cities and regions for a more comprehensive framework in the three policy areas;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Welcomes the emphasis in the draft EU 2020 strategy on the interdependence between policies, the importance of policy integration and the need for better synergies and stronger partnership in the design and delivery of public policies; calls for consideration to be given to the need expressed by regions for a more comprehensive framework in the three policy areas including a technical liaison structure within the Commission to monitor and coordinate synergies for innovation and research and development programmes;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Welcomes the emphasis in the draft EU 2020 strategy on the interdependence between policies, the importance of policy integration and the need for better synergies and stronger partnership in the design and delivery of public policies; calls for consideration to be given to the need expressed by regions for a more comprehensive framework in the three policy areas; and to be associated to the design and implementation of EU funding instruments and state aid regulations;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Welcomes the emphasis in the draft EU 2020 strategy on the interdependence between policies, the importance of policy integration and the need for better synergies and stronger partnership in the design and delivery of public policies; calls for consideration to be given to the need expressed by regions for a more comprehensive framework in the three policy areas and for territorial cohesion to play a special role in this regard;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas innovation is most effectively addressed at regional level with the proximity of actors, such as universities, public research organisations or industry, promoting partnerships in knowledge transfer, and the exchange of good practices between regions;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Believes that future R+D+i programmes should complement national efforts, orienting and dynamising them with a view to revitalising the guiding role and multiplier effect of knowledge, innovation, development and national investment in R+D+I;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Stresses that in order to boost competitiveness throughout the Union it is necessary to examine means of broadening the concept of excellence via the objectives and promotion methods of the future Community framework programmes, so as to apply it to Member States and regions making major efforts to reach the excellence level concerned; believes this would favour positive developments by stimulating investment in R+D+i and expanding the Union’s technological base;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Stresses that in order to consolidate knowledge and innovation as motors of future economic growth, it is necessary to improve the quality of education, build on the results of research, promote innovation and the transfer of knowledge Union-wide, exploit ITCs to the maximum, ensure that innovative ideas are reflected in new products and services that generate growth and quality jobs and contribute to meeting the challenges of social change in Europe and the world, encourage entrepreneurship, prioritise user needs and market opportunities, and guarantee funding of an accessible and adequate nature on the basis of a key role for the Structural Funds;

Amendment 43 #

Karima DELLI, Elisabeth SCHROEDTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Supports the three flagship initiatives of the EU 2020 Strategy for achieving intelligent growth, namely ‘Innovation Union’, ‘Youth on the move’ and ‘A digital agenda for Europe’, in whose implementation the Structural Funds will have a key role to play;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers that a strong and well- financed EU regional policy which benefits all EU regions is a precondition for delivering the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy, as well as for achieving social, economic and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers that a strong and well- financed EU regional policy is a precondition for delivering the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy in order to secure intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as for achieving social, economic and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls on the Commission to allocate sufficient resources to supporting and further developing ‘regional research and innovation strategic frameworks’ within regional operational programmes coming under the Structural Funds;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Stresses the need to review and consolidate the role of the EU instruments that support innovation, namely the Structural Funds, the EAFRD, the Framework Programme for Research and Development, the CIP and the SET plan, with a view to rationalising administrative procedures, facilitating access to funding, especially for SMEs, and introducing innovative incentive mechanisms based on achieving objectives linked to intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as to promoting closer cooperation with the EIB;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)

13b. Considers that the Structural Funds are the appropriate instrument for supporting local and regional authorities in their endeavours to promote creativity and innovation, but that this calls for greater flexibility so as to ensure the swift use of this funding for purposes of promoting business initiatives, especially on the part of innovative SMEs and microbusinesses;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)

13c. Recommends that the entirety of the funding not spent in a given region under N+2 and N+3 be assigned to regionally based venture capital and seed capital funds which could offer, via the EIB, access to financing for SMEs, social enterprises and Community initiatives, or to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, with a view to facilitating the retraining of workers in environment- friendly skills, or to a future Fund for Adaptation to Climate Change, the express aim being to create projects to aid innovation and development for SMEs;

Amendment 5 #

Karima DELLI, Elisabeth SCHROEDTER

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the complexity of today’s challenges calls for an integrated mix of these policies; whereas the knowledge society requires, more than just an aggregation of the activities of the different sectors, a synergy between ~~the~~agents and instruments, which is vital so that they reinforce each other and support the sustainable implementation of research and innovation projects, delivering a better valorisation of research outcome in the form of concrete product ideas in the regions;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that territorial cohesion has a horizontal, multi-sectoral character and therefore Union policies have to contribute to ~~its achievement~~enhancing it by incorporating the urban dimension, given that 80% of Europe’s population lives in towns, which is also where the greatest social disparities are to be found; reiterates that this concept is not limited to the effects of regional policy, but also focuses on coordination with other Union policies;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that territorial cohesion has a horizontal character and therefore Union policies have to contribute to its achievement; reiterates that this concept is not limited to the effects of regional policy, but also focuses on coordination with other Union policies with a strong territorial dimension in order to fully use the regional potential and increase their impact on the ground; is of the opinion that ‘concentration, cooperation, connection’ are the key coordinates of territorial cohesion to reach a better balanced territorial development in the European Union;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that territorial cohesion has a horizontal character and therefore Union policies have to contribute to its achievement; reiterates that this concept is not limited to the effects of regional policy, but also focuses on coordination with other Union policies; stresses the fact that European-level policies properly targeted on sustainable development and offering tangible results at regional level are a concrete uniting factor for achieving territorial cohesion in the EU;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Believes it is necessary to undertake a closer analysis of the territorial impact of the EU’s innovation policies, in order to identify and promote the most suitable means at European level of supporting local and regional investment in innovation; recalls the need to take account of the different social and economic circumstances of the three types of region (convergence, transition and competitiveness), and the variations in creative and innovative capacity and entrepreneurial spirit;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions should pursue smart and green specialisation by, particularly in the area of energy efficiency and renewable energy, as well as defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and ~~concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities~~that this area must therefore also remain an objective of EU regional policy in future;

Amendment 55 #

Karima DELLI, Elisabeth SCHROEDTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions should pursue smart and green specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, as identified in their Regional Innovation Strategies, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities; is of the opinion that the capacity of regional decision makers and entrepreneurs to attract and turn knowledge into sustainable competitive advantage is crucial for a region’s economic performance with an added value also for surrounding regions, including parts of neighbouring Member States;

Amendment 56 #

Iosif MATULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions should pursue smart and green specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities; also stresses the importance of developing specific forms of regional potential which can contribute to boosting regions’ competitiveness and, therefore, attractiveness;

Amendment 57 #

Oldřich VLASÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that cities and regions should pursue smart ~~and green specialisation~~development based on technological advancements by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions should pursue smart and green specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities, in particular in the energy efficiency and renewable energies field, based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities;

Amendment 59 #

Richard SEEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions should pursue smart and ~~green~~sustainable specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates that, ~~for~~in 2007-2013, in conformity with the second Community Strategic Guideline on cohesion, all Member States devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D, innovation and development of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 National or Regional Operational Programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to research and innovation;

Amendment 60 #

Franz OBERMAYR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the need for place-based policies and considers that regions ~~should~~must pursue smart and green specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs, and concentrate earmarked EU resources on these identified priorities;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Supports the proposal of the Committee of the Regions for the creation of a ‘virtual creativity network’ that would be open to all (businesses, local and regional authorities, central public authorities, the private sector and the citizens) and would provide advice, assistance and access to venture capital and technical services; stresses that a virtual network offers the additional advantage of giving the inhabitants of islands, outlying regions, rural areas, mountain areas and sparsely populated areas easier access to expert advice, education and information, business support and financial guidance;

Amendment 62 #

Karima DELLI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Recommends that greater importance and more funding be given to the territorial dimension in the Community research and innovation programmes that are to take the place of the 7th Community programme and the Europe Innova initiative; believes this to be essential with a view to ensuring that measures such as Europe Innova and ‘Regions of knowledge’ have a greater sustainable impact on regional research and innovation systems;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Points out that transnational cooperation is the essence of FP7 and CIP, and that territorial cooperation (via transnational, interregional and cross- border programmes) is mainstreamed in the Structural Funds; calls on the Commission to reinforce the European territorial cooperation objective in the future; calls on the Commission to reinforce European territorial cooperation in the future through its further mainstreaming; invites the Commission to evaluate the possibilities of enhancing territorial cooperation in the field of innovation in each cohesion policy objective; points out that better knowledge on the results of FP7 and CIP at regional level would facilitate the practical coordination between the EU Regional policy and these programmes; calls the European Commission and Member States therefore to facilitate development and accessibility of data on this issue;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Stresses that under the Seventh Framework Programme support is granted to transnational cooperation in its different forms both within and outside the EU, in a number of thematic areas corresponding to the main fields of knowledge and technology, within which it is necessary to support and consolidate high-quality research in order to tackle the social, economic, environmental and industrial challenges facing Europe;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Commission to analyse the impact of simplification measures already taken on the management of the Structural Funds with a view to preparing the future legislative framework;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

Amendment 67 #

Michael THEURER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Acknowledges that both shared and centralised management require specific rules, underlines, however, the need to harmonise the rules governing different instruments; calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end, without prejudice to competences of Member States and regions under shared management; acknowledges that the centrally managed, top-down approach of FP7 and CIP aimed at encouraging European excellence in research and development and the decentralised, bottom-up approach of cohesion policy aimed at encouraging territorial diversity and regional technology transfer each have their own merits; calls for the specific strengths of both support pillars to be promoted at the same time as making use of synergies; emphasises that the strength of cohesion policy lies in offering easily accessible support, and providing improved access to research, transfer of technology and innovation oriented towards practical application, to small and medium-sized enterprises in particular on a wide scale.

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Acknowledges that both shared and centralised management require specific rules,; underlines, however, the need to harmonise the rules governing different instruments; calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end, without prejudice to competences of Member States and regions under shared management, while encouraging interdisciplinarity via common intersectoral strategies in research or technological fields with a view to relaunching joint activity in a range of subject areas, given that joint proposals are an important form of inter-subject cooperation;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates that, for 2007-2013, all Member States devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D, innovation and development of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 National or Regional Operational Programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to research and innovation, of which already €50 billion for core RTD; notes that cohesion policy has become a major source of European support for this field, rivalling the budget of both FP7 (€50.5 billion) and CIP (€3.6 billion);

Amendment 70 #

Franz OBERMAYR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates its call on the Commission to develop specific evaluation criteria for the assessment of innovative projects, and to ~~consider proposing~~draw up and decide on future regulatory incentives for implementing innovation measures;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Sees a clear need for more expertise at regional level regarding applications for funding, administrative and financial procedures, fund management and financial engineering; calls on the Commission to look into the feasibility of providing further specialist support and ensuring closer cooperation between the Enterprise Europe Network and the structural fund managing authorities;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Insists on the importance of taking account of equal opportunities when assessing the suitability of projects and determining access to funding from the Structural Funds and other Community instruments;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Believes that large innovation infrastructures cofinanced by Structural Funds should be subject to a higher evaluation by an international peer review board, which will have a positive effect on the efficient spending of earmarked Structural Funds;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Reiterates that the informal mechanisms governing territorial cohesion and spatial planning in the Council should be replaced by more formal structures; takes the view that this development accompanied by the creation and reinforcement of integrated and cross-theme structures will result in a better coordination of policies;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Appreciates that, for 2007-2013, all Member States devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D, innovation and development of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 National or Regional Operational Programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to research and innovation; points out that, in the interests of effectiveness, there is a need to determine binding expenditure which is proportional to GDP or as a percentage within the Structural Funds in terms of the amounts allocated to research and development spending;

Amendment 9 #