INTERIM EVALUATION OF FP7: OVERVIEW OF EXPERT GROUP REPORT

1. INTERIM EVALUATION OF FP7: OVERVIEW OF EXPERT GROUP REPORT Iain Begg (Rapporteur of the Expert Group) European Institute, London School of Economics

2. APPROACH AND SOURCES • EVIDENCE BASE • Statistical data • Reviews & evaluations • ERC • RSFF • Marie Curie • etc. • Independent studies • CONSULTATIONS • ‘Stakeholders’ • Self-assessments • Other sources • NCP survey • Papers submitted • EXPERT GROUP • Deliberation • Successive drafts • Own expertise • HEARINGS • Commission • Agencies • Researchers • Stakeholders • SUPPORTING EXPERTS • Specific topics

3. INITIAL KEY MESSAGES • FP7 is on course: making contributions to • European science • The ERA • There are acknowledged difficulties in: • Implementation • Connecting research and innovation • Relationship between Member State & EU levels >> But it is important to recognise and applaud what is good

4. STRENGTHS OF FP7 • Sound basis for attaining impact aims • Breadth and scope of ‘reach’ of FP7 • Reassuringly fair and robust conduct of calls • Encouraging evidence on leverage • Fostering development of capacity • Research infrastructure • Training and mobility of researchers • Excellence is being achieved • European Research Council a visible success • High standards in funded Cooperation projects • Average of 13.1 (threshold 10) and 4.4 (4)

5. LEADING PARTICIPANTS

6. IN NEED OF IMPROVEMENT…  • Slow progress on more female participation • Member State challenge as much as FP7 • Evident constraints from size of researcher base • Risk-trust balance out of kilter • Success rates in some areas • Risk of deterring high quality applicants • Apparent underperformance of EU12 • Connecting research and innovation • Finding the right balance for industry

7. THE MOST HEARD CONCERN… SIMPLIFICATION (OR RATHER, ITS ABSENCE)

8. TEN RECOMMENDATIONS I (Many more throughout text) • Advance ERA & Innovation Union goals • Concentration, e.g. on grand challenges • Importance of attaining critical mass • Enhance research infrastructures • At least maintain funding, now & in FP8 • Well-articulated innovation strategy needed • A quantum leap needed in simplification • No more excuses: JUST DO IT!

9. TEN RECOMMENDATIONS II • Rethink mix of funding measures • More ‘bottom up’, open calls • Don’t neglect training aspects of ‘knowledge’ • Consider moratorium on new instruments • Reinforce efforts on female participation • Galvanise Member States • Facilitate capacity building across EU • Improve coherence with Structural Funds • Open-up better to international cooperation

10. IMPLICATIONS FOR FP8 • Ensure connections to core EU policies • Europe 2020, Innovation Union, grand challenges • Better integration of industry • Conjunction of scientific, competitive and societal • More outward looking structure & stance • Main strands to be retained but adapted • But beware further proliferation of measures • Finish unfinished business • Female participation • Resolve flaws in coordination with Member States

11. If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change [tutto deve cambiare perché tutto resti uguale] Giuseppe de Lampedusa, “il Gattopardo”