Facts and Figures accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014

Contents

1..... Introduction and preliminary remarks. 3

2..... Why ERA?. 5

3..... ERA Priorities. 9

3.1.     Effectiveness of national research systems. 9

3.1.1.       National strategies for R&I. 10

3.1.1.       Public funding for R&D and its evolution. 10

3.1.2.       Competition for public funding. 12

3.1.3.       Institutional funding. 14

3.2.     In terms of pan-European cooperation and competition. 15

3.2.1.       Transnational cooperation. 15

3.2.2.       International cooperation. 18

3.2.3.       Interoperability. 21

3.2.4.       Financial commitments for the construction and operation of European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI), national, regional research infrastructures (RIs) of pan-European interest 23

3.2.5.       Access to RIs of pan-European interest 24

3.3.     An open labour market for researchers. 24

3.3.1.       Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers. 25

3.3.2.       Researchers' careers. 27

3.3.3.       Support structured innovative doctoral training programmes. 27

3.3.4.       Removing the barriers to international mobility. 28

3.3.5.       Support mobility between private and public sector 31

Graphs

Graph 1: Number of institutions (left) and share of institutions weighted by number of researchers (right) in each ERA cluster, 2013. 5

Graph 2: Share of RPOs (weighted) by cluster of ERA compliance, 2013. 6

Graph 3: Outputs by RPOs according to their cluster of ERA compliance, 2013. 7

Graph 4: Share of organisations within each cluster implementing some of the ERA actions (according to their ERA compliance), 2013. 8

Graph 5: GBAORD per capita, 2012 (in EUR) 11

Graph 6: Evolution of GBAORD compared with total government expenditures (2007=1) 12

Graph 7: Allocation of funding according to different modalities, by funders in Member States, 2013  12

Graph 8: Share of funder's R&D budget dedicated to joint defined research agendas with non-national funders, 2013. 16

Graph 9: Share of R&D budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries, 2013  19

Graph 10: Share of organisations' R&D budget originating from third countries, 2013. 21

Graph 11: Share of funders which can base their project based R&D decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national funders, 2013. 22

Graph 12: Share of project based R&D budget allocated through peer review carried out by funders outside the country, 2013. 22

Graph 13: Open, excellent and attractive research systems and innovation performance (2014) 25

Graph 14: Share of university-based researchers satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution, Europe (2012) (%) 26

Graph 15: New doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34, EU-27, US and Japan, 2000-2011  27

Graph 16: Types of queries received by EURAXESS Service Centres 2010-2013. 30

Tables

Table 1: Classification of countries according to ERA policies and implementation of the ERA actions  4

Table 2: Correlations between the share of RPOs (weighted) (2013) with three indicators of  performance  8

Maps

Map 1: Classification of EU Member States according to support to project based funding in the R&I strategy and the share of funding allocated as project based by funders, 2013. 13

Map 2: Classification of EU Member States according to the identification of measures in support of institutional funding allocated on the results of institutional assessment and the share of funding allocated by funders using this modality, 2013. 14

Map 3: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of the implementation of joint research agendas and financial support provided by funders, 2013. 17

Map 4: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of collaboration with third countries and the share of funding allocated by funders to this type of activity, 2013. 20

1. Introduction and preliminary remarks

The Commission has developed the ERA Monitoring Mechanism (EMM) with the objective of assessing progress in the compliance of ERA at three different but interrelated levels: national and regional policies, funders and research performing organisations (RPOs).

This report presents progress observed in Member States in terms of adoption of measures in support of ERA[1]. In collaboration with Member States and some Associated Countries[2], the Commission identified new measures and updated the contents of last year’s state of play.

It also presents - for the first time and based on results from the ERA survey 2014[3] - the state of play in terms of support provided by funders (RFOs) for the adoption of ERA measures as well as the implementation of ERA in the different research performing organisations (RPO).

For the funders’ level, there are no official sources of information on ERA implementation, which motivated the Commission to launch the first ERA survey in 2012. The responses to the first exercise were not sufficiently representative. Member States suggested fine-tuning the indicators for the purpose of this exercise. Therefore, the indicators to use and the questionnaire of the ERA survey 2014 have been discussed and agreed with Member States which participate in the European Research Area Committee (ERAC) ad hoc group on the EU semester and ERA monitoring[4]. Strong support by national authorities motivated many funders to answer the survey.

For the RPO level most information on ERA implementation did not exist in official statistical sources. The first ERA survey in 2012 raised a great deal of interest. However, the questionnaire was too long and gathered too much information which turned out not to be necessary to estimate ERA implementation. Therefore, the indicators to use and the questionnaire to employ have also been discussed and agreed with Member States which participate in the ERAC ad hoc group on the EU semester and ERA monitoring4. The ERA survey 2014 received a similar number of responses as in the 2012 exercise.

The results presented in the report provide an indication of the situation only among those institutions which responded to the survey[5], which include funders which manage 34% of total GBAORD in the EU, and performers which employ 32% of total staff and 20% of researchers in RPOs. The constituency in the survey gathers 20% of the most important RPOs as identified by Member States[6].

All indicators have been estimated weighting the answers provided by the organisations. In the case of funders, the answers were weighted by the total funding managed by the responding funders institutions, in comparison with the total funding handled at national or EU level. In the case of RPOs, the results were weighted by the number of researchers (headcount) in the institutions and compared with the total number of researchers in the responding organisations (at national or EU level).

Throughout the analysis it will be shown that the level of ERA implementation varies across countries, reflecting the national situations and contexts. To classify the countries two criteria were used. The first is the existence of specific measures in support of ERA as identified by Commission services. The second is the level of implementation by funders and/or RPOs in comparison with the EU average. In the absence of targets or identified desirable levels of implementation, it is difficult to identify and assess an adequate level of ERA implementation for each of the actions. Whenever meaningful, the degree of support and the implementation are compared with the average observed at EU level. The use of the EU average does not imply that it should be considered to target a desirable level of implementation. On this basis, four (or in some cases five) possible groups could be identified (see Table 1).

Table 1: Classification of countries according to ERA policies and implementation of the ERA actions

|| Specific measures in support of ERA || No specific measures in support of ERA

Implementation above EU average || Top-down ERA proactive || Bottom-up ERA proactive

Implementation below EU average || Limited implementation by stakeholders || Limited measures and limited implementation

Limited measures and no implementation

It should be noted that the EU averages are influenced by the high response rate by German institutions and the low responses by UK RPOs. They influence the average in both directions: upwards in situations where the country’s institutions are very advanced in the implementation of ERA, and downwards on a few other issues for which the level of implementation by German institutions is low.

Finally, it should be noted that the results have to be analysed and used with care by Member States and the Commission.  Responding organisations did not provide any answer for a number of questions, which requires further analysis to explain this lack of responsiveness. Therefore, Member States are invited to check the scope of the results with their constituency when identifying their national policy priorities. 

Nevertheless, it is expected that the results included in this report which accompanies the recently adopted Commission’s Communication ‘Research and innovation as sources of renewed growth’ will help Member States and Stakeholders in identifying areas where more effort is needed on ERA implementation.

2. Why ERA?

– Compliance to ERA differentiates RPOs and also research performance. – ERA compliant organisations produce more patent applications and publications by researcher. – ERA related reforms are still needed, even among ERA compliant organisations, and in some countries, the importance of organisations in the limited compliance to ERA clusters calls for serious attention by the authorities.

Statistical analysis[7] of the responses to the ERA survey 2014 indicates that three types of organisations can be singled out according to their compliance to ERA:

•           ERA compliant: organisations which are implementing some or all of the ERA actions with high intensity.

•           Limited compliance to ERA: organisations which are implementing some of the ERA actions with low intensity.

•           ERA not applicable: organisations in which research is a minor activity or in which the implementation of the ERA actions is not compatible with their mandate.

In terms of number of organisations, the second cluster, Limited compliance to ERA, is the largest. However, the importance of the clusters varies significantly when the number of institutions is weighted by the number of researchers. Then the cluster ERA compliant becomes the largest, gathering 81% of the researchers (see Graph 1)

Graph 1: Number of institutions (left) and share of institutions weighted by number of researchers (right) in each ERA cluster, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

NB: International organisations are not considered in the graph.

It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers employed in the private and public sector).

As shown below, the importance of the clusters (weighted) varies between countries. According to the ERA survey results, in MT, CY, SI and HR, most of the organisations are in the 'Limited compliance' cluster. In CZ, EL and SK the share of organisations is similar in the clusters 'Limited compliance' and 'ERA compliant' (see Graph 2).

Graph 2: Share of RPOs (weighted) by cluster of ERA compliance, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, a higher the share of publications and a higher the number of patent applications are  observed in the ERA compliance cluster in the sample. This result is due not only to the higher number of researchers in the cluster, but also because researchers in this cluster are respectively 15% and 50% more productive on publications[8] and patent applications than in the cluster Limited compliance to ERA (see Graph 3).

Graph 3: Outputs by RPOs according to their cluster of ERA compliance, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

A positive correlation is also observed between national performance indicators and the share of organisations in the ERA compliance group identified through the ERA survey, while it is negative for the other two clusters. This correlation compares the share of RPOs (weighted) with three indicators of performance at national level: the first is scientific and technological research excellence[9], which can be defined as the top-end quality outcome of systematically performed creative work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge and new applications; the second is the Innovation index, as presented in the Innovation Union scoreboard 2014[10], and the third is the Innovation output indicator[11]  (see Table 2).

Table 2: Correlations between the share of RPOs (weighted) (2013) with three indicators of  performance

|| Research Excellence || Innovation Performance || Innovation output indicator

|| Number || Weighted || Number || Weighted || Number || Weighted

ERA compliant || 19% || 52% || 21% || 52% || 21% || 42%

Limited ERA compliant || -24% || -43% || -21% || -42% || -30% || -38%

ERA not applicable || -2% || -35% || -7% || -40% || 1% || -21%

Source: Innovation scoreboard, ECFIN, ERA survey 2014

The implementation, as well as the intensity of implementation (i.e. frequently vs. occasionally) of ERA actions, is not homogeneous within the groups. As observed in Graph 4 according to the ERA survey 2014, even in the ERA compliant cluster the share of institutions implementing the different ERA actions is not close to 100%. For example, only 50% of the organisations in this cluster frequently advertise their vacancies in EURAXESS.

Graph 4: Share of organisations within each cluster implementing some of the ERA actions (according to their ERA compliance), 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

More detail on the situation in each country is presented in the Country fiches annexed to this document, including the share of organisations in each cluster. They also include the comparison of the results at country and EU level for the ERA compliant cluster.

3. ERA Priorities 3.1. Effectiveness of national research systems.

– Guidance through national R&I strategies is present in almost all countries. – Differences in R&I funding remain. – The importance of competitive funding through calls for proposals is difficult to identify. Institutional funding based on institutional assessment is not broadly used by Member States. However, survey results show that the latter is associated with better performance by researchers in RPOs.

Improving the effectiveness of national research systems is an important priority in ERA. Competition to access public funding is an important factor linked with effectiveness. Before presenting the state of play on the allocation mechanisms at national level, the next sections present a brief update on national R&I strategies and the related public funding.

3.1.1. National strategies for R&I

R&I strategies are important as they present the priorities of national and/or regional authorities in these fields. The Commission could identify that all Member States with the exception of Portugal have adopted a national strategy for R&I. In IT, MT, RO and SK the strategies have been adopted/adapted since 2013. There are specific mentions to all or some of the ERA priorities in the strategies of AT, DE, ES, FI, HU, IT, LU, MT, RO, SE, SI, SK and the UK.

For its part, the Commission launched the Smart Specialisation Platform (S3 Platform) in 2012 to support EU countries and regions in the preparation and development of their smart specialisation strategies, facilitating mutual learning and sharing of tools, techniques and practice through a genuine bottom-up approach. By the end of June 2014, more than 150 EU regions and 15 EU countries had registered on the Platform and the vast majority have participated in at least one mutual learning or sharing workshop. In particular, the S3 Platform has developed its own peer-review methodology, which allowed around 60 EU regions and countries to submit their smart specialisation strategy to their peers and experts, receive feedback and decide on the appropriate follow-up action to take. This has been the most comprehensive mutual learning support tool ever launched by the Commission on regional R&I strategies, and proved to be well received by the stakeholders. A more thematic approach was launched in 2013, first via the establishment of the Eye@RIS3, an on-line publicly accessible mapping tool, which gathers the R&I priorities declared by regions and countries in their smart specialisation strategies, and second via the organisation of specific workshops/events around 'common issues' raised by regional or national policy-makers (e.g. the involvement of universities and science parks, the discussion of common priorities, the role of key enabling technologies etc.).

Also, the Commission organised and funded 15 expert groups which visited EE, LT, LV, SK, SI, HU, RO, BG, PL, CZ, EL, ES and PT in order to help local authorities responsible for R&I in preparing their Smart Specialisation Strategies. The reports were formally sent to all relevant Commission services plus the relevant Permanent Representations of these Member States. The reports were extremely pertinent to the governments of these countries as they helped to identify both weaknesses and proposed solutions.

Since February 2014, 11 institutions were awarded an ERA Chair for a period of five years. A new call under Horizon 2020 - Widespread - was published on 11 December 2013 with a call deadline on 15 October 2014. The budget for this call is EUR 34 million. The ERA Chairs brings outstanding researchers to universities and other research institutions that have high potential for research excellence. From their side, institutions mobilise support from different funding sources, including the ESIF, to invest in facilities and infrastructures in the context of their national/regional Smart Specialisation Strategies and commit to institutional change in addition to broader support for innovation.

3.1.1. Public funding for R&D and its evolution

In terms of public funding for research measured through the Global Budget Appropriations or Outlays on Research and Development (GBAORD), big differences remain. Expenses in R&D per citizen are 39 times higher in LU than in BG (See Graph 5). The differences are partly explained by differences in national income and purchasing power. However, it should be noted that GBAORD does not consider other efforts undertaken by national authorities in support of R&D such as tax incentives, credits, etc. whose importance has risen in the past few years, but for which limited information is available.

Graph 5: GBAORD per capita, 2012 (in EUR)

Source: DG RTD based on Eurostat

In terms of the evolution of public funding for research, when compared with total government expenditures the situation also varies greatly among countries. Since the crisis (2007), in the graph below it can be observed that countries above the line have increased their GBAORD in 2012 more than total government expenditures demonstrating the high importance given to R&D (see Graph 6). In the others, fiscal consolidation has been carried out at the expense of R&D (BE, IE, ES, FR, IT, CY, LV, LT, HU, NL, RO, SI, FI, UK). It should be recalled that these figures do not include tax incentives for innovation, which in some cases have been increased in the last few years (at least in FR, NL, UK).

Graph 6: Evolution of GBAORD compared with total government expenditures (2007=1)

Source: DG RTD based on Eurostat[12]

3.1.2. Competition for public funding

Project based funding is the most important way to induce competition in research. The Commission could identify support to the implementation of project based funding in the national R&I strategies in 21 Member States: AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SE, UK.

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014 (see Graph 7), project based is allocated by funders in all Member States, with an average of 64% of their R&D funding allocated using this modality[13]. Funders in four Member States allocate all their funding using this modality.

Graph 7: Allocation of funding according to different modalities, by funders in Member States, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results funders which answered the ERA survey allocate a higher share of their funding as project based than the EU average in 20 Member States.

Map 1: Classification of EU Member States according to support to project based funding in the R&I strategy and the share of funding allocated as project based by funders, 2013

Among the other Member States where the share is lower than the EU average, the Commission could identify specific measures supporting the implementation of project based funding in AT, BE, CZ, DE, ES, IT and LT, whilst in one country (SI) the Commission could not identify any specific measures.

Evaluation mechanisms used for the allocation of project based funding should comply with high standards. The Commission could identify provisions supporting peer review in all Member States. However, these principles vary and are not uniformly used: the Commission identified that in 21 MS the principles are expected to be used in all calls (AT, BE, CZ, DK, EE, EL, FI, FR, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK) while in the rest of the Member States they are expected to be used in some calls (BG, CY, DE, ES, HU, LV, PT).

3.1.3. Institutional funding

Institutional assessment linked with institutional funding is another powerful mechanism to promote competition in research and increase the effectiveness of national expenditures. The Commission could identify measures to support the allocation of institutional funding based on institutional performance in 17 Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, DK, EE, FI, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, NL, SE, SK, UK).

In terms of implementation of institutional assessment for institutional funding, according to the ERA survey 2014 results, funding agencies in 18 of the 22 countries which allocate institutional funding base part or all of it on some form of institutional assessment, while in the other four countries they do not (BG, FI, EL, HU) (see Map 2).

Map 2: Classification of EU Member States according to the identification of measures in support of institutional funding allocated on the results of institutional assessment and the share of funding allocated by funders using this modality, 2013

Among the six Member States whose agencies declared that they do not allocate institutional funding, four Member States (CY, HR, LU, SK) have policies in place to address this issue. In the other two, the Commission could not identify any measure (MT, RO). It should be noted that some funders in some countries did not report their funding modalities.

Almost 70% of researchers in the ERA survey 2014 belong to institutions whose institutional funding is linked to institutional assessment. Of them, 88% are in the ERA compliant cluster.

3.2. In terms of pan-European cooperation and competition 3.2.1. Transnational cooperation

– The relevance given to transnational cooperation is increasing at strategic level in most countries – Differences in share of budget allocated to transnational cooperation are important (1:21) – Several large initiatives (ERA-Nets, Article 185 initiatives, joint programming initiatives (JPIs)) are continued and/or enhanced in Horizon 2020, increasing the coordination and effectiveness of European research

Europe is facing a number of societal challenges for which a combined effort on R&I is needed. The Framework Programme Horizon 2020 is a major facilitator of cross-border research based on excellence. However, in some cases this effort may be insufficient and combined actions by several Member States may be required. The Commission could identify willingness to foster transnational cooperation in national R&I strategies in more than half of the Member States (AT, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EL, ES, FR, HU, IT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI).

The Commission, through its ERA-NET scheme continues to provide financial support from the framework programme by co-funding calls and other joint activities related to the coordination of national/regional R&D programmes. For example, ERA-NET Cofund E-Rare action now coordinates, in combination with Horizon 2020 activities, 40% of all research in the field within ERA. National ministries and their funding agencies appreciate it as a powerful tool, creating joint transnational calls between national programmes with an almost constant total volume of EUR 400 - 500 million per year. They have also used the scheme to launch a broad variety of additional activities that strongly support the realisation of ERA.

In May 2014 Parliament and Council adopted the four Article 185 initiatives, which are research programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States, proposed by the Commission as part of the Innovation Investment Package (IIP), based on Article 185 TFEU. In total, the Commission will invest EUR 1.5 billion from Horizon 2020 in the four initiatives. These activities contribute to the coordination of national research programmes. For example, the Article 185 initiative on Metrology now coordinates 50% of the European research and is considered the leading metrology research programme in the world. Further initiatives might follow after the mid-term review of Horizon 2020. 

Joint programming initiatives aim to pool national research efforts to tackle common European challenges more effectively in a few key areas (10 since 2010). For example, the JPI on Neurodegenerative diseases contributed to an increase in overall investment to tackle the major societal challenges (from less than EUR 100 million to EUR 350 million), it increased coordination of research in ERA (from less than 5% to 10% of all ERA research in the field), attracted 'Foreign Direct Investment' from Canada and will eventually contribute to more effective research in Europe. They are led by Member States and have only received EU support for their set-up phase. Most JPIs have now adopted joint strategic research agendas setting their priorities and some have multi-annual implementation plans. In total their joint activities up to the end of 2013 amounted to more than 20 joint calls and joint actions for a total of more than EUR 200 million. However, this amount is still of a limited size considering that at European level[14], with the exclusion of the Framework programme and the European Funding Agency funding, less than 1% of national public R&D funding is spent on transnational research.

Finally, a specific focus has been developed within the Smart Specialisation Platform (S3 Platform) on trans-national co-operation, through the establishment of permanent liaisons with two EU macro-regional strategies (those for the Baltic Sea Region and the Danube Region). The contribution has been methodologically targeted to the identification of concrete issues through the decisive involvement of stakeholders. The Danube region stakeholders focused on financial support of trans-national R&I projects, while the Baltic Sea Regions stakeholders focused on the priority-setting process and the subsequent identification of concrete joint projects.

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, the average share of funding dedicated to joint research agendas[15] among the funders which answered the survey is 1.42% of their R&D budgets[16] (see Graph 8). The 'intensity' of support for the implementation of joint research agendas varies from very low shares to a maximum of almost 30% in the case of Malta. In the latter case, the high figure may reflect a specific project and not a regular thrust.

Graph 8: Share of funder's R&D budget dedicated to joint defined research agendas with non-national funders, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 3), according to the ERA survey funders in almost half (13) of Member States funders dedicate a higher share of funding to joint R&D agendas with other EU countries than the EU average.

Map 3: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of the implementation of joint research agendas and financial support provided by funders, 2013

In the other 15 Member States the share of funder’s budget dedicated to these issues is below the EU average or non-existent. Among them, in six cases (BG, CZ, DE, EL, ES, SI), the Commission could identify support for the implementation of joint research whilst in other countries (CY, EE, IE, LT, LV, UK), the Commission could not identify any explicit measure or strategy. In three cases, the funders did not report any support (HR, HU, SK).

Given the importance of the societal challenges that Europe is facing in addition to R&D budgetary evolutions presented above, Member States may consider the possibility of further coordinating their research efforts whilst allocating more resources to their implementation.

3.2.2. International cooperation

– Member States are increasingly open to international cooperation – Horizon 2020 is open to the participation of legal entities from across the world. The Commission will seek to enhance international cooperation through: – horizontal activities – targeted activities across the societal challenges – enabling and industrial technologies – other relevant parts of Horizon 2020

Openness of ERA to the rest of the world is an important factor for knowledge generation both in Europe and abroad. The Commission has been able to identify specific support in 12 Member States: AT, CZ, DE, DK, FR, IT, NL, RO, SE, SI, SK and the, UK. In three of these countries, new measures were proposed/adopted in 2014.

Regarding international cooperation, 85% of the National Rectors’ Conferences (NRCs) surveyed by EUA in 2013 indicated the existence of international research collaborations at national level. Results also showed that EU Countries partner with other EU Countries, Associated Countries and third countries on an equal basis (point validated by 90% of the respondent NRCs). In particular, regarding bilateral agreements with third countries, NRCs indicated the existence of agreements with the United States of America, Canada, Japan, China, Brazil, and Russia. Other countries, such as India or South Africa, were also mentioned, although less frequently.

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, funders in more than half (17) of Member States allocate an average of 0.7% of their budget to collaboration programmes with third countries, ranging up to almost 4.3% in Germany[17] (see Graph 9).

Graph 9: Share of R&D budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results among the funders in the 19 countries which indicated that they dedicate funding to international cooperation, in six of them funders dedicate a higher share of funding than the EU average (more than 2.4% of their funding). Among them, in five countries (DE, DK, FR, NL, UK) the Commission could identify policy support. Funders declared that there is no budget allocated to these activities in BG, CY, EE, HR, HU, IE, LU, MT and SK.

Map 4: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of collaboration with third countries and the share of funding allocated by funders to this type of activity, 2013

In the other 13 Member States there are two situations. In six countries (AT, CZ, IT, RO, SE, SI), the Commission could identify measures in support of international cooperation whilst in three others (BE, EL, ES, FI, LT, LV, PL), the Commission could not identify any explicit measure or strategy.

In order to step up the intensity of international cooperation in R&D, in September 2012 the Commission adopted a Communication entitled "Enhancing and focusing EU international cooperation in R&D: a strategic approach[18]". With this Communication, the Commission called for making better informed, and therefore more strategic, choices as regards the areas selected for cooperation and the international partners with whom to engage, in particular with a view to preparing for the implementation of Horizon 2020.

In line with the aim of the new strategy, the Commission's ambition is to increase the participation of legal entities from international partner countries in Horizon 2020 projects and, more generally, to enhance international cooperation activities supported or catalysed through Horizon 2020. Integrating international cooperation into the first Horizon 2020 work programmes, strengthening communication on the openness of Horizon 2020 to the participation of international partners and enhancing cooperation with the external funding instruments and overall EU external policies have been major points of attention during the two years of implementation of the Commission's new international cooperation strategy.

Another important factor linked with international cooperation is that RPOs may attract funding from third countries, both from the public and the private sector. The degree of funding received may reflect the attractiveness of the RPO in the country. According to the results of the ERA survey 2014[19], research performers in 24 Member States receive part of their funding from third countries, ranging from very low shares up to almost 9% in the case of Hungary (see Graph 10).

Graph 10: Share of organisations' R&D budget originating from third countries, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

3.2.3. Interoperability

– Mutual recognition of evaluation results is linked with funding allocation, opening the way for more interoperability

Cross border cooperation and implementation of joint research agendas will be facilitated by the adoption of common procedures and standards, but also by delegating some of the task to other actors beyond the national borders. This is the case, for example, when funding agencies in one country fund their constituency on the basis of results of an evaluation carried out by a stakeholder in another country.

According to the ERA survey 2014, funders in 24 Member States can base their project based funding on evaluation results from non-national funders (see Graph 11), even if the proportion of funders which can do so varies significantly between countries. It should be recalled that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

Graph 11: Share of funders which can base their project based R&D decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national funders, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

Also, according to the ERA survey 2014 results the proportion of funding allocated using this modality by funders which answered the survey varies greatly (see Graph 12).

Graph 12: Share of project based R&D budget allocated through peer review carried out by funders outside the country, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

NB: funders in Croatia which answered the ERA survey indicated that 100% of their project based funding is allocated using this modality. It was not included in the graph to facilitate the presentation of the results for the other countries.

To facilitate interoperability, the Commission prepared and held a workshop on “Why and how to facilitate cross-border research operations in ERA?” in February 2013, addressing the issue of the potential ERA-Mark, proposed in the ERA Communication of July 2012, as a voluntary label for attesting that national research programmes possess criteria that would facilitate trans-national collaboration with other programmes. Key conclusions were that it is an interesting concept and that the ERA Mark could provide more action and evidence at EU-level. However, it was also concluded that it will need to be periodically renewed, opened to international partners and that a wide range of stakeholders need to be involved in the development of the concept to make the ERA Mark happen (RPOs, the European Network of Innovation Agencies (TAFTIE), structural funds experts, etc.)

In addition, to test the feasibility of synchronised calls in Horizon 2020, in 2014 the Commission launched an open call (CSA) in order to fund the process. However, the Commission did not receive any proposals.

3.2.4. Financial commitments for the construction and operation of European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI), national, regional research infrastructures (RIs) of pan-European interest

– The commitment to have completed or launched the construction of at least 60% of the ESFRI roadmap projects by 2015 is in reach – Member States should regularly report their financial contribution to the development of  the RIs included in the ESFRI roadmap – The development of the Charter of Access for Research Infrastructures is well advanced

ESFRI is a strategic instrument to develop the scientific integration of Europe and to strengthen its international outreach. As confirmed by the Council on 26 May 2014, Member States commit to focus their available national resources on the respective prioritised projects in which they are financially participating.

The commitment under the Innovation Union of the Member States and the Commission to have completed or launched the construction of at least 60% of the ESFRI roadmap projects by 2015 is in reach. The prioritisation of the ESFRI roadmap projects confirmed by Council in May 2014 will allow Member States and the Commission to give additional support for reaching this objective. Progress can also be seen from the report that is to be presented by the Commission to Council and Parliament, concerning the application of the European Research Infrastructure Consortium Regulation (ERIC) in which it is stated that although the take up of the new legal instrument was relatively slow, with the establishment of seven ERICs and the prospect of reaching about 15 ERICs in 2015, momentum seems to have been reached by Member States using this instrument which will lead to a further fulfilment of the ERA.

Most Member States (22) have national roadmaps for the development of RIs (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IE, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK, soon HR)[20]. Among these countries, the intention to contribute to the development of ESFRI in national roadmaps in 21 cases (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IE, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK). Upon the Commission’s request for the purpose of the current report, only two Member States (SE, UK) were able to report its financial contribution to the development of the RIs included in the ERA roadmap, while financial indications are present in several national roadmaps for RIs.

Member States should enhance their efforts in identifying and reporting the actual financial contributions from the Member States to the development of the RIs included in the ESFRI roadmap.

3.2.5. Access to RIs of pan-European interest

The competitive and open access to high quality RIs supports and benchmarks the quality of the activities of European scientists and attracts the best researchers from around the world.

Under the Commission initiative, progress has been made in the development of a Charter of Access for Research Infrastructures which is to be published at the beginning of 2015 and would allow for a more efficient use of these European infrastructures by users from across Europe.

In addition, the Commission could identify the existence of a strategy to support the competitive and open access to RIs in 12 Member States (BG, EL, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, NL, PL, RO, SK, UK) and specific supporting measures in AT, DE, EL, ES, HU, IE, LT, NL, PT and the UK.

3.3. An open labour market for researchers

An open and attractive labour market for researchers is an essential component of the ERA. Significant progress has been made in removing or alleviating some of the obstacles to mobility, improving doctoral training and making research careers more attractive, albeit to varying degrees across countries.

Across the EU, Member States and/or institutions have introduced a range of measures, programmes, strategies and legislative acts. This includes, for example, measures to make research a more attractive career option through the implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers. Work has also centred on enhancing the quality of doctoral training, in particular to prepare doctoral candidates for a career outside academia, and on measures to improve researchers' career development opportunities through, for example, life-long learning.

For its part, the Commission has focused efforts on a series of policy initiatives which have contributed to the overall progress. This includes further development of the EURAXESS network, in particular a large increase in the publication of research job vacancies, the revised "Scientific Visa Directive", the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers based on the Charter and Code, the European Principles of Innovative Doctoral Training and support for a new pan-European supplementary pension fund for researchers. Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions have also had a pronounced structuring impact on ERA by setting standards for research training, attractive employment conditions and open recruitment for all EU-researchers, and by aligning national resources as well as influencing regional or national programmes through the Co-fund mechanism.

Progress has nevertheless been uneven and a number of challenges remain, in particular in a number of Member States where the lack of open, transparent and merit-based recruitment gives cause for concern, where intersectoral mobility is relatively low or where working conditions and career opportunities are rather limited. A concerted and coordinated effort is needed from the Member States and institutions together with the Commission.

3.3.1. Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

Evidence shows that countries with open and attractive research systems are strong performers in terms of research excellence and innovation (see Graph 13). While several factors play a role in determining whether a system is open and attractive, it is clear that open, transparent and merit-based (OTM) recruitment is a prerequisite. Open competition enables hiring of the best researchers, at all career stages and fosters effective geographical mobility. This is important because recent research by the OECD[21] shows that 'on average, the research impact of scientists who change affiliations across national boundaries is nearly 20% higher than that of those who never move abroad.' OTM recruitment also has the potential to match supply and demand across Europe and can have a positive impact on equal opportunities for men and women.

Graph 13: Open, excellent and attractive research systems and innovation performance (2014)

Source: DG Research and Innovation calculations based on Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014

While policymakers generally understand the recruitment systems in place to be OTM, a substantial share of researchers do not perceive OTM as such, which potentially acts as a major disincentive to start or remain in a research career. The results from the MORE2 survey demonstrate strong country specificity in levels of satisfaction with open recruitment. Additionally those in the early career researcher stages are most dissatisfied with the openness and transparency of their recruitment and female researchers show lower levels of satisfaction than males: data shows that around 40% of researchers associated to European universities were 'dissatisfied' with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution. This average masks significant differences between countries, e.g., while 22% of researchers in the UK were not satisfied, the figures increased to 54% in Portugal, 55% in Greece and 69% in Italy (see Graph 14).

Graph 14: Share of university-based researchers satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution, Europe (2012) (%)

 

Source: MORE2 Study

The European Code of Conduct for the recruitment of researchers has had a positive but limited impact, due to its voluntary nature, on OTM recruitment procedures. Moreover, the majority of individual institutions which have received the Human Resources for Researchers Excellence logo have reviewed, or are in the process of reviewing, their recruitment processes. As part of Horizon 2020, there is now an obligation on beneficiaries (Article 32 of the Grant Agreement) to take all necessary measures to implement the Code of Conduct.

One prerequisite for OTM recruitment is to ensure publication of the vacancy. In this regard, following concerted efforts by the Commission, several Member States and institutions, the number of research vacancies posted on EURAXESS Jobs continues to grow from 7,500 in 2010 to over 40,000 in 2013. This excellent progress, which is helping to match demand and supply across borders, has been boosted by national legislation to make it mandatory for publicly funded institutions to advertise their positions on EURAXESS (e.g. Poland, Croatia, Italy) or at least internationally (Austria). An increasing share of universities and other employers are also publishing vacancies. NordForsk has renewed its grant agreement for Nordic Centres of Excellence (NCoE) which includes a mandatory requirement, stating that any new positions funded by the NCoE grant shall be announced internationally in open competition and according to OTM recruitment procedures. Similarly, a survey carried out by the League of European Research Universities (LERU) in 2013 showed a high degree of compliance with OTM recruitment among its members.

In line with a recommendation by the European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) mutual learning workshop held in March 2014, the Commission intends to work closely with Member States and stakeholders to produce an OTM recruitment toolkit/practitioner's guide during 2015, including good-practice examples, templates, and other material useful for HR practitioners/employers of researchers.

3.3.2. Researchers' careers

Member States continue to support the implementation of the Charter and Code (C&C)[22] which aims to improve researchers’ working conditions. More than 480 organisations from 35 countries in Europe and beyond have explicitly endorsed the principles underlying the C&C, Many of them are membership or umbrella organisations.

The Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) supports institutions and funders in the implementation of the C&C principles in their policies and practices. Award of the ‘HR Excellence in Research’ logo recognises institutional progress in this process and helps institutions to promote themselves to prospective research talent as providers of a favourable work environment. Currently, more than 240 organisations are members of a Strategy Group. As of May 2014, more than 180 organisations have received the logo. A significant proportion of the awarded logos are within the UK which reflects the strong enabling framework provided by Vitae. Moreover, thirty stakeholder organisations in the UK have developed the 'Researcher Development Framework', a strategic agenda to train and support researchers and further improve their skills. In contrast, a number of other Member States[23] are underrepresented or absent altogether from the HRS4R.

A feasibility study on a possible certification mechanism for human resource management found little support among stakeholders. Nevertheless, the results showed strong support to continue with the HRS4R and to strengthen the procedure. A series of seminars with stakeholders is therefore being organised in 2014-2015 to see which areas of the C&C can be strengthened in the process. SHO partners in the ERA platform have encouraged their members to engage in the HRS4R process by organising working groups, high level discussions and workshops, launching surveys, and improving guidelines.

3.3.3. Support structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Europe has relatively few researchers employed in the private sector. They make up only 45% of total researchers compared with 78% in the US, 74% in Japan and 62% in China. At the same time Europe continues to train an increasing number of PhDs (from around 72,000 graduates in 2000 to 115,000 in 2011), at a rate similar to the US and well above Japan (see Graph 15). Although the majority of PhD graduates will embark on careers outside of academia (evidence shows that in France, Germany and the UK over 50% of all PhD degree holders now take up jobs outside academia), early stage researchers are often inadequately informed about career paths outside of academia and are not equipped with the necessary skills to work in industry and other relevant employment sectors.

Graph 15: New doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34, EU-27, US and Japan, 2000-2011

 

Source: Eurostat Education Statistics

The seven Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training (IDTP), endorsed by the Council in 2011, aim to foster excellence and a critical mind-set and provide young researchers with transferable skills and exposure to industry and other employment sectors. Their wider uptake has been explored through a study[24] on the implementation of the principles in 2013 (with on-site visits to 20 universities in 16 countries) and Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions support. The study concluded that the principles are well-accepted, subscribed to by all target groups at institutional, doctoral, policy and non-academic levels and are considered as a ‘guiding tool’. They are, however, 'not commonly known in the documented form. Similar ideas or principles, often worded differently, form the basis of doctoral training across Europe', although the understanding and implementation of the principles varies. Research excellence seems to be the ‘leading’ principle, based on quality assurance and attractiveness of the research/institutional environment.

Progress can be observed in several Member States although the challenge remains in the wider roll-out in terms of reach, financing and sustainability and the engagement of industry in PhD training. Examples of good practice include the German Research Foundation which has set up programmes such as research training groups (Graduiertenkolleg) or the graduate schools in the Excellence Initiative to increase the quality of doctoral training. Here the projects have to adhere to principles similar to the IDTP to receive the funding. Quality assurance is actively pursued in the Vienna Biocenter where a new position, the Scientific Coordinator, has recently been created to ensure the quality of the programme. The coordinator will also initiate changes to the programme e.g. regarding the curriculum (for example, integrating transferable skills training into the curricula in the context of an introductory training course), internal communication and information provision. Interdisciplinarity is at the heart of doctoral education at the University of Ljubljana. In doctoral training the teaching as well as the research is interdisciplinary. Promoting interdisciplinarity has contributed to an increase of intra- and inter-institutional cooperation and some efficiency gains have also been reported. At the Tallinn University of Technology (Estonia), doctorate holders are encouraged to go abroad for a post-doc period and indeed need to do so in order to apply for funding.

The Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions will enable around 25,000 doctoral candidates to be recruited by 2020 to high-quality programmes in Europe. These will provide experience outside academia, hence developing increased employability skills amongst PhD holders.

The European University Association (EUA)’s Council of Doctoral Education (EUA-CDE) has been a strong advocate and promoter of doctoral education and training reforms through its 'Salzburg Principles', 'Salzburg II Recommendations' and has contributed to the development of the 'Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training'.

3.3.4. Removing the barriers to international mobility

The researcher population is highly mobile internationally. Around 31% of EU post-PhD researchers have worked abroad (EU or worldwide) as researchers for more than three months at least once during the last ten years.[25] In terms of impact, the perception among the majority of researchers is that the mobility experience is largely positive. For example, 80% of internationally mobile researchers felt that the mobility had a positive impact on developing their research skills. More than 60% believed that mobility had (strongly) increased their ‘research output’ (quality of output, citation impact, patents, number of co-authored publications, etc.). And 55% of researchers thought that career progression had increased as a result of their mobility. It is important to note, however, that a significant proportion (40%) of mobile researchers perceived their mobility experience as having had a negative effect on two particular aspects, namely their 'job options' and 'progression in their remuneration'. The reasons behind this are as yet unclear but include issues such as a lack of recognition of mobility and ‘forced’ mobility.

EU-wide, 68% of doctoral candidates are nationals studying in their own country.[26] A further 8% are EU nationals studying in another EU country. The remaining 24% are from outside the EU. France (35%) and the UK (31%) have relatively high proportions of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates in their respective countries. The highest number of non-EU doctoral candidates enrolled in the EU came from China (7,523) followed by Brazil (3,400), the United States (3,243), Mexico (3, 206) and India (2,903). Numbers from China and India have increased significantly in recent years.

The Commission, in cooperation with Member States, has initiated a wide range of initiatives to facilitate researchers’ mobility and increase the attractiveness of Europe as a destination for leading researchers. These include measures to facilitate access to information on mobility via EURAXESS, the 'Scientific Visa' package facilitating administrative procedures for third country researchers entering the European Community as well as Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and Destination Europe Events.

In addition, many Member States have introduced national mobility schemes to boost different types of researcher mobility (inward, outward and cross-sectoral). Many of these schemes promote inward mobility from both EU and non-EU countries providing financial incentives for early stage researchers. The KOLUMB Programme (Poland), for example, awards fellowships to the best young scholars to enable them to stay (from 6-12 months) at the world’s leading research centres. Non-financial incentives include measures promoting ‘dual careers’, such as the Dual Career Network (France, Germany and Switzerland). Some countries provide tax incentives to facilitate researchers’ mobility in Europe while others such as Ireland offer special visas to attract researchers to engage in research.

3.3.4.1. EURAXESS

EURAXESS continues to play a key role for researchers wishing to pursue their careers in Europe. More than 200 EURAXESS Service Centres in 40 European countries are responding to the increasing demand for information and assistance with more than 900,000 queries in the past six years. In 2013, EURAXESS Ireland launched a new Industry User Interface for business users. Companies can advertise vacancies, search an online database of researchers' CVs, access the fast track research visas system and search for funding support opportunities. The Commission is exploring the possibility of rolling this out to other countries so that business users across Europe will have a tailored interface.

EURAXESS Links continue to support European researchers in the US, Japan, China, India, ASEAN region and, as of 2013, Brazil and Canada. Its mandate has been extended to also support non-European researchers wishing to move to Europe. For example, EURAXESS Links information officers act as intermediates between the non-EU country and a EURAXESS Service Centre, thus speeding up the provision of information.

Graph 16: Types of queries received by EURAXESS Service Centres 2010-2013

 

Source: DG RTD - EURAXESS statistics

3.3.4.2. Visa procedures

Fast-track immigration is an important consideration for internationally mobile researchers and is thus an important factor in helping attract the best global talent to Europe. In March 2013, the Commission proposed a recast of the Scientific Visa Directive that will set clearer time limits for national authorities to decide on applications; provide researchers with greater opportunities to access the labour market during and after their stay, and facilitate mobility within the EU. The proposed Directive is under negotiation by the European Parliament and Council.

3.3.4.3. Social security obstacles for mobile researchers

Mobile researchers face obstacles related to social security, in particular with regard to their pensions. To respond to this need, the Commission is committed to supporting stakeholders in setting up pan-European supplementary pension fund(s) for researchers. A Task Force was created in 2013 to prepare a proposal on the establishment of a pan-European Retirement Savings Vehicle (RESAVER) for professionals employed by research organisations. The Commission has foreseen funding under Horizon 2020 to sponsor the set-up of notably the Institutions or Occupational Retirement Provision (IORP), the insurance scheme as well as the functional administration, including the selection of provider(s). The fund should become operational in early 2015.

3.3.4.4. Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

In January 2014, Science Europe published a 'Practical Guide to Three Approaches to Cross-border Collaboration'. This guide provides Science Europe Member Organisations and other research organisations with information and advice on three optional models of collaboration: Money follows Researcher (MfR), Money follows Co-operation Line and Lead Agency Procedure.

Related to the above, Science Europe Member Organisations have been invited to sign a new ‘Letter of Intent’ to indicate their intention to implement MfR, where relevant. This is an agreement that can allow a researcher to take the remainder of a grant with them when moving to a new country, and is therefore a model of grant portability. Signatories commit to providing publicly-available information on how this is organised in their institution, thus improving the transparency and visibility of MfR.  The Science Europe website will list participating institutions.

3.3.5. Support mobility between private and public sector

Member States have put in place various measures to boost partnerships between universities, research institutions and private companies and to better align the skills acquired with the skills needed. These include the implementation of joint projects, commercialisation programmes, research traineeships in companies, inter-sectoral mobility programmes and industrial PhD programmes. For example, the Danish Industrial PhD Programme aims to offer doctoral training in cooperation with the industry sector. It is a three-year research project and research training programme with an industrial focus conducted jointly by a private company, an industrial PhD candidate and a university. It inspired the European Parliament to fund the kick-start of the MSCA European Industrial Doctorates. The Fraunhofer Society in Germany offers doctoral candidates the possibility of pursuing a PhD in applied research in close collaboration with industry. In addition, in order to be appointed to a professorship in engineering at a university, or a professorship in any subject at a university of applied sciences, applicants need to have gained professional experience outside of academia. The University of Porto has – in cooperation with other Portuguese universities and companies – a PhD programme that is funded by a new scheme of the national funding agency to intensify university-industry collaboration.

It is important to note however that, in terms of intersectoral mobility, only 4% of PhD candidates have experience of working in private industry during their PhD[27]. The extent of moving out of public sector research into the private sector for a short period during doctoral studies or thereafter is still very much the exception, even though it is perceived as potentially beneficial for a researcher’s career, access to funding and the exploitation of research results. The topic was addressed at an ERAC Mutual Learning Workshop on Human Resources and Mobility in March 2014 which put forward a series of recommendations.[28]

The European University Association (EUA) has conducted extensive work on the doctoral level, including through the DOC-CAREERS II project which looked solely at how universities work with their regional partners in doctoral education across Europe. The regional focus of the action allowed EUA to identify examples of university collaboration with local SMEs, large R&D enterprises, RTD performers, NGO’s and other sectors (health care, cultural, etc.).

[1] The identification of new measures undertaken by Member States was based on the analysis of the 2014 National Reform Programmes and also on information provided by the Joint Research Centre, notably the specific analysis of the implementation at national level of the ERA Communication priorities carried out with the support of independent national experts.

[2] It concerns those Associated Countries which indicated their willingness to participate in the exercise at the Commission’s invitation.

[3] There is no register of public funders or of research performing organisations in ERA. With the help of national authorities Commission services developed a list of around 600 public funders and around 8,500 research performing organisations which were invited to participate in the ERA survey 2014. The organisations were requested to provide the information on a voluntary basis. This implies that the results are biased, as they correspond only to the situation in those institutions which answered the survey and not the overall situation in each Member State.

[4] See annex 5.1

[5] The use of “micro” data for the identification of ERA implementation and possibly policy assessment appears to be extremely interesting. However, the limited response rate restrains the scope of the results. In future similar exercises Member States and the Commission need to continue interacting to identify possible ways to further motivate the national organisations to participate in the exercise.

[6] Member States were requested to identify among the full list of organisations the most important research performers in their countries. This information was matched with the respondents to the survey.

[7] The methodology to identify the clusters is presented in annex

[8] This figure reflects the number of publications by researcher, excluding the outliers (institutions with more than 5 publications by researcher) in the sample.

[9] The top-quality output of scientific and technological research activities at the national level is measured considering four variables: (i) a field-normalised number of highly cited publications of a country as measured by the top 10% most cited publications (in all disciplines) per total number of publications (HICIT); (ii) the number of high quality patent applications of a country as measured by the number of patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) per million inhabitants (PCTPAT); (iii) the number of world class universities and research institutes in a country as measured by the number of organisations of a country in the top 250 universities and 50 research institutes divided by gross expenditures in R&D of a country per (TOPINST); and (iv) the number of high prestige research grants received by a country as measured by the total value of European Research Council grants received divided by public R&D expenditures of a country (ERC). For details see Hardeman et al., 2013.

[10]http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/innovation-scoreboard/index_en.htm

[11]http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2013/pdf/staff_working_document_indicator_of_innovation_output.pdf

[12] Croatia is not included in the graph as data for this country is only available for 2012.

[13] It should be noted that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014 which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[14] This represents 0.2% of total GBAORD for 2012.

[15] Research funding organisations were asked to indicate their approximate percentage of the organisation’s overall R&D budget dedicated to joint research agendas with EU countries in 2013. Joint research agendas were defined as “annual or multiannual research agendas for a joint programme between EU Member States outside the framework of the EU Framework Programme. Joint research agendas include activities such as JPIs and ERA-Net+ where the bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.”

[16] It should also be noted that these figures concern funders which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[17] It should be mentioned that these figures concern funders which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[18] COM(2012) 497

[19] It should be recalled that these figures concern research performing organisations which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[20] In five cases, new developments have been observed since 2013 (DE, EE, NL, HR and BE).

[21] OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2013 Innovation for Growth

[22] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/europeanCharter

[23] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/strategy4ResearcherOrgs

[24] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/IDT%20Final%20Report%20FINAL.pdf

[25] MORE2 Study on mobility and career paths of researchers

[26] Eurostat Education Statistics

[27] MORE2 study

[28] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/ERAC%20Final%20Report.pdf

Facts and Figures accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014

Contents

3.4.     In terms of gender equality and gender content in research. 3

3.4.1.       Gender equality in research. 3

3.4.2.       Gender balance in decision making process. 8

3.4.3.       Gender dimension in research content/programmes. 12

3.4.4.       Gender equality at EU level 15

Graphs

Graph 17: Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) 3

Graph 18: Share of funders frequently supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion of gender dimension in research content, 2013. 4

Graph 19: Share of RPOs which have adopted GEPs, 2013. 4

Graph 20: Share of RPOs implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers, 2013  7

Graph 21: Share of RPOs whose heads were women, 2013. 9

Graph 22: Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels in funders, 2013. 10

Graph 23: Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in RPOs, 2013  11

Graph 24: Share of funders supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content, 2013. 12

Graph 25: Share of RPOs which include the gender dimension in research content, 2013. 13

Maps

Map 5: Classification of EU Member States according to measures supporting gender equality and the adoption of GEPs, 2013  5

Map 6: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of recruitment and their implementation by RPOs, 2013  7

Map 7: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to improve gender balance in the decision making process and the share of women who are heads of RPOs, 2013  9

Map 8: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of gender content in research programmes and frequent support provided by funders, 2013  12

Map 9: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of gender contents in research programmes and the implementation by research performing organisations, 2013  14

In terms of gender equality and gender content in research 3.4.1. Gender equality in research

– Specific national policies on gender equality in public research have been adopted in 17 countries. – A high share of respondent RPOs implement Gender Equality Plans (GEP) and/or recruitment/promotion policies for female researchers in countries where national laws or strategies for gender equality in public research have been set up. A similar trend/situation cannot be found in the responses of the funders. –  There are still big differences among Member States, funders and RPOs concerning gender balance in decision-making bodies. – Although the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content and programmes is mentioned by more countries than in 2013, the level of implementation remains insufficiently supported. – Gender equality and gender dimension in research content has been reinforced in Horizon 2020. 

Gender equality in research is essential not only because it is fair, but notably because it helps cope with current and future deficits in skilled labour within the EU. However, in 2011 disparities remained (see 19).

Graph 1: Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount)

Source: Eurostat

The Commission could identify that 17 Member States have developed gender equality strategies in public research to various degrees (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, LT, NL, SE, SI, UK), among which eight countries have specific laws/acts regulating gender equality in public research (AT, BE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, PL).

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, the share of respondent funders which support gender equality frequently in their research programmes and/or projects was higher in six Member States than the EU average (82.2%)[1]. Among these, in four cases the Commission could identify measures or strategies at national level to improve gender equality in public research (DE, NL, SI, UK) (see Graph 2).

Graph 2: Share of funders frequently supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion of gender dimension in research content, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In 22 Member States the share of funders which frequently support gender equality is below the EU or non-existent. Among these, in nine cases (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DK, ES, FI, FR, SE) the Commission could identify measures or strategies to improve gender balance in public research institutions.

In order to reinforce gender equality, the RPOs can adopt and implement Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, 64% of the respondent organisations implement such a plan[2] (see Graph 3). It should be noted that a large share of organisations in some countries (up to more than 70% in the case of Croatia) did not provide an answer to this question. In addition there are big differences across countries.

Graph 3: Share of RPOs which have adopted GEPs, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results the share of RPOs which have adopted GEPs is above the EU average in eight Member States (AT, DE, FI, FR, MT, NL, SE, UK). Among these, in seven cases the Commission could identify measures or strategies to improve gender equality in public research (AT, DE, FI, FR, NL, SE, UK).

Map 1: Classification of EU Member States according to measures supporting gender equality and the adoption of GEPs, 2013

Among the other 20 countries, in ten cases the Commission could identify supporting provisions (BE, BG, CZ, DK, EE, EL, ES, HR, LT, SI). In ten other countries (CY, HU, IE, IT, LU, LV, PL, PT, RO, SK) the Commission could not identify any provision.

In terms of recruitment of female researchers in public research, the Commission could identify specific support in the following Member States: AT, BE, DE, DK, EL, ES, HR, NL, SE, UK.  The latter has recently (May 2014) announced a call to action to boost women’s participation in technology and engineering.

In terms of implementation of recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers, according to the ERA survey 2014 results, an average of 59% of respondent RPOs are implementing recruitment and promotion policies[3]. However, the share of institutions implementing them varies significantly among countries (see Graph 4).

Graph 4: Share of RPOs implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 2), according to the ERA survey 2014 results, the share of respondent RPOs which implement recruitment and promotion measures for female researchers is above the EU average in nine Member States. Among these, in five cases the Commission could identify specific policies for recruitment of female researchers at national level (AT, DE, NL, SE, UK).

Map 2: Classification of EU Member States according to the measures in support of recruitment and their implementation by RPOs, 2013

Among the other 19 Member States, where the share of respondent RPOs supporting the implementation is below the average, the Commission could identify that in five of them (BE, DK, EL, ES, HR) the authorities have specific policies for recruiting women researchers. In BG, CY, CZ, EE, FR, IE, IT, LT, LU, PL, PT, RO, SI and SK, the Commission could not identify any measures.

3.4.2. Gender balance in decision making process

At the level of decision making in public research institutions, the Commission could identify national initiatives to improve gender balance in senior positions (AT, BE, DE, DK, HR, NL), quotas (AT, BE, EL, ES, FR, LU),  targets (AT, DE, DK, EL, ES, FR, HR, IT, SE, SI) and/or awards (AT, BG, CZ, DE, DK, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI).

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014 the proportion of organisations whose heads were women is 18% on average, with strong variations among countries, ranging from 5% in EL to 50% in LU[4] [5] (see Graph 5).

Graph 5: Share of RPOs whose heads were women, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 3), according to survey results the share of organisations with women heads of institutions is above the EU average in almost half (13) of Member States.

Map 3: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to improve gender balance in the decision making process and the share of women who are heads of RPOs, 2013

Among the countries where the share of institutions headed by a woman  is below the EU average, the Commission could identify national initiatives for the access of female researchers to senior positions in BE, DE, DK and NL, but no initiatives in CZ, EL, ES, FR, HU, IE, IT, LV, PL and PT.

Another important issue is the participation of the underrepresented sex in evaluation and recruitment panels. A target of a minimum of 40% for all panels has been agreed. According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, 35.8% of research evaluation panels include at least the 40% target of the underrepresented sex in their composition[6]. The share varies significantly among the responding funders (see Graph 6).

Graph 6: Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels in funders, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms, the share of gender balanced evaluation panels in funding is above the EU average in ten Member States. Respondent funders in three countries (CY, MT, SK) did not identify any gender balanced evaluation panel, and one Member State (HR) did not provide information on this issue.

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, on average 36.6% of recruitment committees of RPOs in the EU respect the 40% target of under-represented balance in their composition (see Graph 7). It should be recalled that these figures concern RPOs who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

Graph 7: Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in RPOs, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

 In comparative terms, gender balanced recruitment committees are above the EU average in nine Countries (ES, HR, IE, LU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE).

The Commission continues to enforce the target of 40% of the under-represented sex which is set in evaluation panels and expert groups. For advisory groups, the target is raised to 50% and each advisory group includes at least one expert with gender expertise.

3.4.3. Gender dimension in research content/programmes

The consideration of the gender dimension contributes to improve excellence and pertinence of research. The Commission could identify that provisions for the inclusion of the gender dimension in research contents/programmes are in place in ten Member States (AT, DE, DK, ES, FR, IE, IT, NL, SE, SK).

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, funders in only a few countries support the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes. In eight countries respondent funders answered that the gender dimension is frequently integrated in research content[7] (see Graph 8). The share is very high in the case of IT, which influences the EU average strongly.

Graph 8: Share of funders supporting gender equality in research and the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results the share of respondent funders supporting the frequent inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes is above the EU average in one Member State.

Map 4: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of gender content in research programmes and frequent support provided by funders, 2013

Among the rest of the countries, in six Member States (AT, DE, ES, IE, NL, SE) the Commission could identify measures supporting the inclusion of the gender dimension included in research content / programmes.

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, on average 44% of RPOs which are ERA compliant include the gender dimension in research content (see Graph 9). The share of institutions doing so varies significantly among Member States. It should be noted that these figures concern RPOs who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

Graph 9: Share of RPOs which include the gender dimension in research content, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 5), according to survey results in almost half (13) of Member States the share of research performing organisations including the gender dimension in research content is above the EU average.

Map 5: Classification of EU Member States according to the support to the inclusion of gender contents in research programmes and the implementation by research performing organisations, 2013

Among the other countries, where the share of organisations is below the EU average, eight countries have measures in this area (AT, DE, DK, IE, FR, IE, NL, SE).

3.4.4. Gender equality at EU level

Gender equality has been reinforced in Horizon 2020. The Commission is pursuing an effective application of the new gender equality provisions of Horizon 2020. This means integrating gender equality issues at each stage of the research cycle, from programming through implementation, monitoring and programme evaluation. To stimulate applicants’ engagement at proposal level, gender balance in research teams is one of the ranking factors to prioritise proposals with the same scores. In Horizon 2020, applicants are invited to describe, where relevant, how sex and/or gender analysis (i.e. the gender dimension) is taken into account in their project’s content. The gender dimension is explicitly integrated in more than a hundred topics across all sections of the Horizon 2020 Work Programmes 2014-2015. Topics with an explicit gender dimension are flagged, to facilitate their identification by potential applicants on the H2020 Participant Portal.

The need for institutional change in RPOs and funders, as well as a reinforced coordination at EU level, has been highlighted by the Stakeholder platform (see section 3.6) to overcome differences remaining among Member States concerning gender equality in public research. To this end, the Commission has organised joint meetings with the doers’ network “gender” of the Stakeholder platform. Moreover, the Commission provides financial support to transnational cooperation within the Gender-Net ERA-Net project. Through specific calls on “Gender Equality in Research and Innovation” (GERI) of the “Science With and For Society” programme, the Commission gives financial support to the setting of Gender Equality Plans in RPOs and funders to improve the participation and career paths of women researchers and to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes. 

[1] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern funders which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[2] It should be noted that these figures concern RPOs which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515,000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[3] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern RPOs which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[4] In Malta, the heads of the three organisations who answered the survey are men.

[5] It should also be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[6] It should be recalled that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[7] It should be noted that these figures concern funders which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

Facts and Figures accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014

Contents

3.5.     In terms of circulation of and access to scientific knowledge. 3

3.5.1.       Open access. 3

3.5.1.       Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors  10

3.5.2.       Policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services  17

Graphs

Graph 26: Share of funders funding open access to publications, 2013. 3

Graph 27: Share of funders systematically funding open access to data, 2013. 5

Graph 28: Share of research performing organisations systematically making available on-line and free of charge [publicly funded] scientific research data, 2013. 7

Graph 29: Share of funders systematically supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of their institutional and/or project based funding, 2013. 10

Graph 30: Share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities, 2013. 13

Graph 31: Share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities, 2013. 14

Graph 32: Share of research and development budget financed by private sector, 2013. 15

Graph 33: Share of staff employed by RPOs whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents), 2013. 16

Graph 34: Share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.), 2013. 18

Graph 35: Share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers, 2013. 19

Maps

Map 10: Classification of EU Member States according to the support open access to publications and frequent support provided by research funding organisations, 2013. 4

Map 11: Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to data and frequent support provided by research funding organisations, 2013. 6

Map 12: Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to data and the implementation by research performing organisations, 2013. 8

Map 13: Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and and the support provided by research funding organisations, 2013. 11

Map 14: Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and the existance of Technology Transfer Offices in research performing organisations, 2013. 13

Map 15: Classification of EU Member States according to the support provided to federated identities and their provision by research performing organisations, 2013. 19

In terms of circulation of and access to scientific knowledge 3.5.1. Open access

– Open access for publications resulting from publicly funded research is becoming the standard. In Horizon 2020 open-access to peer-reviewed publications is the default setting – Open access to data may require more frequent financial support from funders - as well as more proactive action by research performers - to increase their importance

Open access (OA) means unrestricted online access to peer-reviewed scholarly research. Most Member States (23) have a similar understanding of the scope and objectives of open access, in line with the Commission’s definition (AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, UK). The objective of promoting open access is included in national laws in PL, ES, SE, EE, LT and HU.

The Commission could identify that open access to publications is supported in AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, IE, IT, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE and the UK, and the implementation is supported by a working group in BE, BG, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI and IT. In terms of modalities, both green and gold open access[1] are supported by AT, DK, EE, EL, FR, HR, IT, PL, PT, SE, UK, green open access is the main modality in CY, IE, LT and LU, and gold open access in NL and RO.

The Commission is concerned with open access in its capacities as a policy maker (proposing legislation), a funding agency (the FP7 and Horizon 2020 framework programmes for research and innovation) and a capacity builder (through funding of specific projects for open access infrastructure and policy support actions). The file is shared between the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation and the Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology. In Horizon 2020 the Commission has made open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications the default setting.

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, different attitudes by funders in Member States are observed. In those situations where open access is supported, the average share of funders supporting it frequently is 44.6% (see Graph 1). It should be recalled that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

Graph 1: Share of funders funding open access to publications, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 1), according to survey results in 13 Member States the share of funders frequently supporting open access to publications is above the average.

Map 1: Classification of EU Member States according to the support open access to publications and frequent support provided by research funding organisations, 2013

In the other countries the situation varies: in four Member States (BG, DE, IT, SE) the Commission could identify measures in support of open access, in one case (SI) the Commission could not identify policy support. In four cases (CY, HR, RO, SK), the funders which answered the survey did not declare  any support to open access.

Concerning open access to data, the Commission could identify support in DE, EL, ES, IE, IT, PL, PT, RO and the UK.

According to the results of the ERA survey 2014, funding open access to data is not a common practice in funding organisations from several Member States[2] (see Graph 2). Among those Member States whose funders support it, the average share of funding organisations frequently supporting it is 28.1%.

Graph 2: Share of funders systematically funding open access to data, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 2), according to survey results in seven Member States the share of funders frequently supporting open access to data is above the average.

Map 2: Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to data and frequent support provided by research funding organisations, 2013

In the other countries where no frequent support is provided, the situation varies: in four Member States (DE, ES, IE, IT) the Commission could identify measures in support of open access to data; in three cases (AT, CZ, FR) the Commission could not identify policy support, and in six cases (CY, HR, LV, MT, SI, SK) funders which responded to the survey declared that they are not providing any support to open access to data.

According to the ERA survey 2014 results RPOs in all Member States declared that they make scientific research data available on-line and free of charge[3] (see Graph 3). The average share of organisations which do this frequently is approximately 19.4%.

Graph 3: Share of research performing organisations systematically making available on-line and free of charge [publicly funded] scientific research data, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 3), survey results show that a combination of policies and willingness by research performing organisations has induced that in most Member States the share of organisations making their data available is above the (low) EU share average (19.4%).

Map 3: Classification of EU Member States according to the support of open access to data and the implementation by research performing organisations, 2013

The Commission committed itself to running a pilot on open access to research data in Horizon 2020, taking into account the need to balance openness and protection of scientific information, commercialisation and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), privacy concerns, security as well as data management and preservation questions. This open access to research data pilot concerns selected areas of Horizon 2020 ('core areas'). Projects not covered by the scope of the pilot can participate on an individual and voluntary project-by-project basis ('opt-in'). Projects may also decide not to participate in the pilot for several specific reasons ('opt-out'). First results of the uptake of the pilot in the proposals submitted in the first calls of Horizon 2020 appear promising.

The Commission also funds several projects to support and provide further insights into open access and related issues, such as RECODE (recommendations on open access to research data), FOSTER (training and awareness raising), PASTEUR4OA (networking OA actors) and of course OpenAIRE (infrastructure and national helpdesks). Specific support for projects participating in the Horizon 2020 pilot on open access to research data is provided through projects funded in the e-Infrastructure calls of the Horizon 2020 Research Infrastructures Work Programme 2014-15.

In terms of repositories for open access, the Commission could identify several modalities in Member States. National repositories are preferred in EE, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, MT, NL, SI, SK and the UK. The preferred option is institutional repositories in BE, BG, FI, HR, LT, MT, PL, SI. In two Member States (HR, IT) the regional repositories are preferred.

3.5.1. Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

– Strong policy support (strategies, networking, etc.) in most Member States to Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) but no frequent financial support by funders in half of Member States – Knowledge transfer offices are present in a (weighted) majority of research performing organisations – Most Member States encourage strategic partnership with the private sector. However,  the share of funding of public institutions by the private sector is limited – The Commission has committed to developing a comprehensive policy approach on open innovation and knowledge transfer. The Commission is continuously facilitating and supporting the development and cross-border networking of national knowledge transfer office networks and the work of existing pan-European networks

Knowledge transfer of research results contributes to innovation. This explains that most Member States are supporting knowledge transfer through strategies, incentives, etc. The Commission identified that supporting modalities vary. In 16 Member States a national strategy on knowledge transfer is implemented (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, FR, HR, IE, LT, LU, LV, NL, PL, SE). In most cases, the strategy is accompanied by specific funding. A national network of knowledge transfer is in place in AT, LV, NL, PL and UK. The professionalization of knowledge transfer activities is supported by BE, DE, DK, EE, FR, LU, LV, MT, NL, RO and SE.

According to the ERA Survey 2014 results, funders in almost all Member States support the implementation of knowledge transfer in their programmes and/or projects[4] (see Graph 4). The average share of funders frequently supporting it in the EU is 69.3%.

Graph 4: Share of funders systematically supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of their institutional and/or project based funding, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 4), according to survey results the share of funders frequently supporting knowledge transfer is above the EU average in eight Member States.

Map 4: Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and and the support provided by research funding organisations, 2013

Among those countries where the share of funders frequently supporting knowledge transfer is below the average, eight Member States (AT, BE, CZ, DK, FR, LT, PL, SE) have set a strategy whilst in FI, IT  PT and SI the Commission could not identify a strategy. In SK the funders who responded to the survey did not indicate any support.

The Commission has committed to developing a comprehensive policy approach on open innovation and knowledge transfer. For this purpose, the Commission established an Expert Group to assess what can be done to improve knowledge sharing and utilisation. The Expert Group has delivered a report which offers a new, advanced open innovation paradigm: it sets out to describe how to build and fund ecosystems for co-creation.

The Commission also carries out studies with findings contributing to the development of a comprehensive policy approach to KT and OI. An on-going study is providing support to the development and implementation of commitment n° 21 of the Innovation Union addressing collaboration and knowledge transfer. An additional study was recently launched, with an overall objective to consolidate an EU wide information base on OI and KT. The results of the studies will help to determine which additional measures might be needed to ensure an optimal flow of knowledge between the public research organisations and business, thereby contributing to the development of the knowledge based economy.

An indicator that can be used to assess the degree of attention to knowledge transfer in RPOs is the existence of a knowledge transfer office. According to the results of the ERA survey 2014 most research performing organisations (70% on average) have a technology transfer office[5] (see Graph 5).

Graph 5: Share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 5), in eight Member States there is a knowledge transfer strategy and the share of RPOs which have Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) is above the EU average.

Map 5: Classification of EU Member States according to the existance of a knowledge transfer strategy and the existance of Technology Transfer Offices in research performing organisations, 2013

Among the other cases, in eight countries (AT, BE, CZ, DK, FR, LT, PL, SE), the Commission could identify the adoption of a knowledge transfer strategy whilst in FI, IT, PT and SI the Commission could not identify a knowledge transfer strategy.

Another indicator linked with knowledge transfer is the presence of dedicated staff to knowledge transfer RPOs. According to the ERA survey 2014 results, in most Member States more than 50% of the RPOs have knowledge transfer staff[6] (see Graph 6).

Graph 6: Share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities, 2013

 

Source: ERA survey 2014

Partnership of academia with the private sector is another important factor which contributes to innovation. In 17 Member States, the Commission could identify specific support to strategic partnership with the private sector (AT, BE, CZ, DE, FI, FR, HR, IT, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SI, SK, UK).

A proxy to measure attractiveness of public research organisations is the share of research and development budget financed by the private sector. According to the ERA survey 2014 results, on average, 7.8% of the budget of RPOs originate in the private sector[7] (see Graph 7). The variation across countries is quite important; half of Member States are below the average.

Graph 7: Share of research and development budget financed by private sector, 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

Also, according to the ERA survey 2014 results a strong variation is observed in terms of staff employed by RPOs whose primary occupation is in the private sector[8] (see Graph 8). The average share of researchers in this category (in FTE) is 2.1%.

Graph 8: Share of staff employed by RPOs whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents), 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

In general the Commission is committed to a modern and efficient IP infrastructure that supports innovation in all its stages. In the case of patents, the implementation of the Unitary Patent System is a clear example in this sense. It will provide innovators and creators – and hence researchers - with access to broader territorial protection at lower costs, trigger a reduction of red tape and make it easier for inventors to access the single market and internationalise their activities. It will fosters technological transfer, as it will not be necessary anymore to register a patent transfer in each country in which the transaction needs to have legal effect. In addition, the centralised registration and publication of unitary patents will make it easier to access patent literature.

In order to gather insight on how to address some IP related barriers, the Commission set up two Expert Groups. Expert Group on IP valuation  was created to address the difficulty in assessing value and in access to funding. To do this, the group looked at which improvements could be done regarding the evaluation of the economic value of IP in order to foster IP related transactions and IP based finance. In addition, an Expert Group on Patent valorisation was created and will look at how to increase transparency of the IP market, increase awareness of business opportunities around IP and decrease transaction costs linked to IP transactions.

The Commission is continuously working with relevant stakeholder groups to facilitate and support the development and cross-border networking of national knowledge transfer office networks and the work of existing pan-European networks. In addition, Horizon 2020 pilots a Technology Transfer Financing Facility which will co-finance investments made by existing technology transfer (TT) funds and vehicles. It will focus on TT undertaken via the creation of new companies and the licensing of intellectual property, and concentrates on the proof-of-concept, development and early commercialisation stages of the TT process. Specific calls are also foreseen in Horizon 2020, for instance on capacity-building on TT encouraging and - where appropriate - incentivising the more established and experienced funds and TT offices (TTOs) to share their expertise and best practices with their less experienced counterparts. The latter will complement Horizon 2020 Technology Transfer Financing Facility pilot.

3.5.2. Policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

– Strong support by the European Commission to enable world-class science based on High Performance Computing, wifi infrastructure and grid infrastructure, federating national initiatives – More effort is needed to ensure the provision of federated identities

Europe’s National Research and Education Networks are specialised Internet service providers dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within their own country. The Commission could identify such national networks in 26 Member States: AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK and the UK. These networks facilitate the integration of researchers in the countries in the Digital ERA.

PRACE (Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe) has been a key enabler for world-class science based on High Performance Computing (HPC), awarding, since 2010, more than 8 billion computing core hours of Tier-0 systems to 303 scientific projects from 38 countries. PRACE has provided training in HPC to 2,700 people in 360 full days through its PATCs (Advanced Training Centres days) and has held more than 180 events for community building in HPC. Finally, PRACE has also allowed access to HPC infrastructures to 20 industries (including SMEs) in the first year of its industrial access programme.

Universities’ and research organisation’s wifi infrastructure can be accessed through a federated technology called “eduroam” whose development is supported by GÉANT project (funded by the EC). This technology allows students and researchers to seamlessly access their IT infrastructure through wifi using their home organisation’s credentials even in situations of mobility. This technology is deployed in all MS and AC with an estimated 200,000 wifi base stations equipped and 21 million accesses per week (100% growth year/year) including 12% across border access (as of April 2014). This technology is a key integrator of wifi infrastructures and ensures IT mobility not only between countries but also inside countries and regions.

The European Grid Infrastructure (EGI) is a crucial provider of IT resources for science in Europe. Driven by the needs of the scientific community, it enables sharing of computing power for scientific purposes between Member States. The EGI federates the National Grid Initiatives (NGIs), which operate grid infrastructures at country-level. In 2013 the EGI provided more than 3.7 billion computing core hours (kSI2K) linking 53 countries with more than 300 resource centres and around 430,000 cores.

In terms of provision of digital services for research and education, TERENA, the Trans-European Research and Education Networking Association, has identified three main kinds of services: support to collaboration, cloud services and premium services (these include consultancy services, security audits, etc.). According to TERENA, the degree of provision of Digital services varies among Member States: the three kinds of services are provided by CZ, EE, ES, FR, HU, IE, LT, LU, NL and SI; cloud and collaboration support by EL, Cloud and premium services by BE and PL, Cloud services in LV, collaboration support in SE and finally premium services by: DE, DK and PT.

In the survey, RPOs were requested to indicate the provision of seven types of services. As the combination of possibilities is quite high, the results of the ERA survey are presented according to the  number of services provided to researchers. According to the results the share of institutions not providing any digital services is quite high in many cases ("No services" in more than 10% of the institutions in BE, BG, CZ, EE, EL, FR, HR, HU, LU, PL, SI, SK)[9] (see Graph 9).

Graph 9: Share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.), 2013

Source: ERA survey 2014

The provision of federated electronic identities facilitates the access to digital services by researchers. The Commission could identify that more than half of Member States are members of an identity federation: AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, FR, HR, IE, LU, NL, PL, SE, SI and the UK of which BE and LU in 2013 and that 18 countries are members of the eduGAIN service, which is intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations: AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, HU, IE, LV, NL, PL, SE, SI and the UK, of which EE and AT in 2013.

According to the ERA survey 2014 results, on average around 43% of the RPOs provide federated identities to their researchers[10] (see Graph 10).

Graph 10: Share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers, 2013

 

 Source: ERA survey 2014

In comparative terms (see Map 6), according to survey results RPOs in more than half (16) of Member States are providing federated identities above the EU average.

Map 6: Classification of EU Member States according to the support provided to federated identities and their provision by research performing organisations, 2013

Among the rest of the countries, six Member States (CY, HR, HU, LU, MT, RO) are not yet members of an identity federation nor of eduGAIN.

[1] Open access publishing (also referred to as 'gold' open access) means that an article is immediately provided in open access mode as published. In this model, the payment of publication costs is shifted away from readers, paying access via subscriptions. The business model most often encountered is based on one-off payments by authors. These costs (often referred to as Author Processing Charges, APCs) can usually be borne by the university or research institute to which the researcher is affiliated, or to the funding agency supporting the research. In other cases, the costs of open access publishing are covered by subsidies or other funding models. Green open access implies that the acceptance of a time lag before making the article available to potential users.

[2] It should be mentioned that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[3] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[4] It should be reminded that these figures concern funders who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which represent 34% of total EU GBAORD.

[5] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[6] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[7] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations which answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[8] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[9] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

[10] It should be mentioned that these figures concern research performing organisations who answered the ERA survey in 2014, which employ 515 000 researchers (around 20% of total EU researchers).

Facts and Figures accompanying the ERA Progress Report 2014

Contents

3.6.     Actions in support of ERA by the members of the Stakeholder platform.. 3

3.6.1.       Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research (CESAER) 3

3.6.2.       European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO) 5

3.6.3.       European University Association (EUA) 6

3.6.4.       League of European Research Universities (LERU) 8

3.6.5.       NordForsk. 10

3.6.6.       Science Europe. 11

3.7.     Actions in support of ERA by the members of EIROforum.. 12

3.7.1.       CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire) 12

3.7.2.       EMBL (European Molecular Biology Laboratory) 13

3.7.3.       ESO (European Southern Observatory) 15

3.7.4.       ESRF (The European Synchrotron Radiation Facility) 15

4..... Final remarks. 17

4.6.1.       Progress in policy support is constantly observed. 17

4.6.2.       ERA national policies lead to ERA implementation. 18

5..... Annexes. 20

5.6.     Assessment of the ERA indicators. 20

5.7.     Methodology for clustering the RPOs (2014 ERA survey) 24

5.8.     The 2014 ERA survey. 24

5.9.     Clustering RPOs according to ERA compliance. 26

5.10.   Matching ERA policies with ERA implementation. 31

5.11.   How to analyse the results of the survey in the country fiches. 34

5.12.   Glossary  38

5.13.   Concepts used in the analysis of national policy context in support of ERA.. 46

5.14.   Sources of information. 55

5.15.   Results of the survey by country. 57

Graphs

Graph 36: Representativeness of fs when compared with national GBAORD 2012. 25

Graph 37: Share of total funding managed by responding funders, by country. 25

Graph 38: Representativeness of RPOs in terms of total researchers in the country. 25

Graph 39: Share of country’s researchers among the total number of researchers in responding RPOs  26

Graph 40: Variables projected onto the first factorial plane F1-F2. 27

Graph 41: First factorial plane with organisations identified by size and jointly projected with patents. 27

Graph 42: Number of areas in which policy has been adopted in the different Member States. 32

Graph 43: Number of areas in which implementation by Member State is above the EU average. 33

Tables

Table 3: Number of initiatives taken by Member States since last year’s ERA Progress Report. 17

Table 4: Number of measures adopted (or being adopted) by area of intervention. 17

Table 5: Score given for each domain of activity to the policy support and to the implementation by funders or performers. 31

Maps

Map 16: Classification of Member States according to their policies in support of ERA and their implementation  18

Actions in support of ERA by the members of the Stakeholder platform

The work of the Stakeholder platform has evolved since the last ERA Progress Report. The meetings with the heads or representatives of the research Stakeholders' Organisations have continued, but several ad hoc “Doers” networks were created to tackle in detail some specific issues related to ERA. The Doers groups concerned gender, communicating ERA, joint programming, monitoring, open access, and research infrastructures. Doers meetings are organised according to the needs and developments of the policy agendas.

A new partner, the Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research (CESAER), joined the European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO), the European University Association (EUA), the League of European Research Universities (LERU), NordForsk and Science Europe in the Stakeholder platform in 2013.

The platform has created a new momentum for joint activities between its participants. The research Stakeholders' Organisations jointly organise events (such as two fringe sessions in the 2014 Innovation Convention) and regularly participate in each others activities when relevant to their mandate.

Besides, all participants in the platform contribute regularly to the ERA newsletter, and they also participate in its dissemination.

Each research Stakeholders' Organisations is also very active in raising ERA awareness amongst their member Organisations, including through strategic discussions around ERA priorities and policy, as well as in relation to the future direction of ERA.

In the following sections, some of the recent activities of each research Stateholders' Organisation which participate in the Stakeholder platform are presented.

3.6.1. Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research (CESAER)

Launching of joint working groups with partner associations CLUSTER, EuroTech Universities, IDEA League and Nordic Five Tech on:

· “Innovative Doctoral Training” and

· “Institutional Research Strategies and Management – Professionalisation of Knowledge Transfer”.

Several task forces are in place:

“Human Resources”, with priorities on Human Resources Strategies for Researchers (HRS4R), recruitment, career development, academic leadership, gender, and performance assessment. Papers on the different issues are in the pipeline. In print: CESAER Comment on “Open Recruitment”, “Leadership and Leadership Development in Academia”. “Entrepreneurship”, which is preparing a White Paper on the specialty of entrepreneurship at technical universities. “Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)”, which is working towards the adoption of RRI policies by CESAER and other relevant parties. In September, the Task Force RRI will present comments and recommendations for the Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2016-2017. “Open Access – Open Data”, which is preparing a CESAER position on Open Access for mid-2014 and guiding material on Open Access for the end of 2014. “Open Education”, which is in the starting phase.

In terms of monitoring:

Survey on gender equality at CESAER member institutions. The final report will be produced by October 2014; respondents to the survey will be convened for a workshop at Vienna University of Technology on 28-29 November 2014 for discussing the outcomes and possible follow up activities. Monitoring of the implementation of Charter and Code for Researchers and Human Resources Strategies for Researchers. Monitoring of the participation in the framework programmes and collaborative links between members with a specific focus on “Spreading of excellence and widening participation”. In-depth web analysis of structures and activities supporting knowledge circulation at CESAER member institutions.

Organisation of, or participation in, events:

Set up the ERA Partnership Fringe Session in the frame of the Innovation Convention, 10 March 2014. Participation in the ERAC Mutual Learning Seminar “Open Recruitment and Transnational Mobility”, Brussels, 26 March 2014. CESAER Conference “Human Resources in Academia”, organised by the Task Force “Human Resources, TU Delft, 21-22 May 2014. Parallel session in the priority areas of the Task Force. The Conference Report is in preparation.

· Participation in the JRC Conference “Scientific Support for the Danube Region”, Vienna, 24-25 June 2014.

· Participation in the “Gender Summit 4 - Europe 2014, From Ideas to Markets”, Brussels, 30 June – 1 July 2014; Speaker: Karel Luyben, President CESAER.

· Participation in HRS4R Mutual Learning Seminar. Tarragona, Spain; 2-3 October 2014

· Workshop “Responsible Research and Innovation”, Tallinn University of Technology, 15 October 2014

2014 CESAER Seminar “Widening Participation”, Tallinn University of Technology, 16 October 2014.

Other activities:

CESAER is a member of the 4th Cohort for the Human Resource Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) and organises stimulation measures towards the implementation in CESAER member institutions. Main academic partner in the pilot edition of the Internship Programme of the European Institute of Technology Foundation (EITF). Contribution to the drafting of the 'Charter for Access to Research Infrastructures' in the ERA Monitoring Doers Configuration. With a mandate from CESAER, Paul Jankowitsch (Vienna University of technology) chaired the task force set up for the preparation of the Retirement Savings Vehicle for European Research Institutions (RESAVER). 3.6.2. European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO)

EARTO currently has 7 active working groups. Six of them discuss topics related to ERA.  They concern: legal aspects (improving state aid RDI Framework, General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER) & Enhanced Programmable Communication Interface (EPCI) schemes to best achieve ERA objectives); SMEs (best practices on how to best work with SMEs and national programmes of technology transfer RTOs-SMEs); H2020 (implementation aspects, including open access and gender balance requirements in H2020 projects); Communication (how to best communicate EARTO members activities on ERA related topics);  Human Resources (HR managers discussing topics such as open recruitment, careers and gender balance, pension and doctoral training, mobility of researchers) and Structural Funds (how to best achieve synergies between H2020 and EU Structural Funds).

Publications:

EARTO has published several position papers in relation to ERA objectives since January 2014:

ERRIN & EARTO Comments to the Commission Staff Working Document "Enabling synergies between European Structural and Investment Funds, H2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related Union programmes". The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Scale as an R&I policy tool - EARTO recommendations. EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation on State Aid for Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI). EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation on the GBER. EARTO response to the European Commission Public Consultation on the EU State Aid Framework for R&D&I.

Conferences:

EARTO and its members organised and participated in several events on ERA related topics. The key events are:

EARTO Annual Conference, May 2014, in which 200 participants gathered to discuss RTO-business cooperation, focusing on the topic of 'How can RTOs support the re-industrialisation in Europe'. EARTO co-organised and participated in two fringe sessions on ERA topics at the European Commission Innovation Convention 2014:  'The ERA partnership as a backbone of the European innovation eco-system(s)' and 'how research partnerships are turning on the Innovation Growth Machine in Europe'.

EARTO members were also very active in the Gender Summit Europe which took place in June 2014.

3.6.3. European University Association (EUA) Organisation of the High-level conference on 'Mobilising Europe's Universities for Smart Specialisation' convened with the S3 Platform and DG REGIO. The objective was to raise awareness about the importance of universities' contribution in the definition and implementation of RIS3. High-level consultation has been initiated by EUA to engage in the essential dialogue with DG REGIO on how the Seville Report recommendations can be taken forward in the implementation of the European Regional Development Fund and European Social Fund (300 participants). Publication of a joint report EUA- DG REGIO/JRC on 'The role of universities in smart specialisation' (EUA Publications, 2014) issuing recommendations to enhance the role of universities in the definition and implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategies. Contribution to the drafting of the Charter for Access to RIs within the framework of the MoU Doers Group on Research Infrastructures. Preparation with other SHOs of 'high-level' talks with major publishing houses to explore 'do-able' business models that reflect the impact of digital technological developments on the process of producing scientific publishing, as well as operational conditions for open access that meet universities’ needs. Publication in April 2014 of a statement on the proposal for a general Data Protection Regulation, highlighting the potential threat to research. Active promotion of best practices of university participation in international agreements to foster peer-learning and synergy across these international activities through the activities of EUA’s Council for Doctoral Education (CDE). In particular, promotion of doctoral education/training reforms through its 'Salzburg Principles' based on best practice (2005) and revised in 2010. These principles form the core of the 'Principles of Innovative Doctoral Training' taken up by the European Commission. Organisation of the Annual Meeting of CDE as a stocktaking exercise of reforms in doctoral education in June 2013 (over 200 participants). Organisation of the upcoming 2nd EUA Funding Forum (October 2014) bringing together higher education and research stakeholders to discuss funding models and the impact of EU funds on university management.

In terms of monitoring and analysis, the following activities amongst others, can be mentioned:

Monitoring of trends in public funding to the university sector via the EUA Public Funding Observatory (yearly release and online tool including data for more than 20 European countries). EUA 2013 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) questionnaire to universities on development and implementation on policies addressing doctoral training, research careers, mobility and gender equality. This resulted in an awareness map, the implementation of human resources policy awareness and the implementation of 224 European Universities. EUA 2013 questionnaire to 34 National Rectors’ Conferences (NRCs) on policies at national level regarding doctoral education and training, mobility and international cooperation. Publication of a joint report EUA- DG REGIO/JRC on 'The role of universities in Smart Specialisation' issuing recommendations to enhance the role of universities in the definition and implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategies based on the outcome of the workshop. Monitoring of national developments in open access, particularly regarding implementation of open access requirements for H2020 through dialogue with the EUA 34 NRCs. EUA has started analysing data on the gender composition of university management based on the database of EUA membership (4,250 individual university managers). Organisation of the Strategic Global Forum for Doctoral Education in March 2013 with 30 leaders in doctoral education from across the globe, producing a common statement on the need for a balanced global research community.

Participation in EU funded projects:

Study on ways to enhance European universities' financial sustainability (EUDIS project: European Universities Diversifying Income Streams), awareness-raising and capacity-building activities (EUIMA-Full Costing): Sharing Innovative Practices in University Modernisation). Through the ongoing DEFINE project (Designing Strategies for Efficient Funding of Higher Education in Europe) EUA is conducting research and stock-taking exercises in order to provide recommendations to policy makers and universities to improve the efficiency of the funding to the university sector. More than 200 universities contributed to these projects. Study on collaborative research between universities and companies involving all stakeholders (EUIMA-Collaborative Research) to identify main factors of success to establish and sustain long-term university-business cooperation. On supporting mobility between private and public sector, the DOC-CAREERS II project (Promoting Collaborative Doctoral Education for Enhanced Career Opportunities), explores how universities work with their regional industry and authorities across Europe. More than 100 universities contributed to these projects. 'Cooperation on Doctoral Education between Africa, Asia, Latin America and Europe' project (CODOC; 2010-2012) and 'Framework for the Internationalisation of Doctoral Educatio' project (FRINDOC) which monitor developments regarding global collaborations in doctoral education through the Erasmus Mundus projects. These projects mobilised more than 100 universities. Further information on EUA's activities in 2013 and 2014 within the framework of the MoU can be found here:

 http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Publication/2014_EUA_MoU_report.sflb.ashx.

3.6.4. League of European Research Universities (LERU)

Publication of several papers/statements related to ERA. Among them:

Briefing paper for the next EU legislature entitled 'An ERA of Change'; Briefing paper 'LERU takes concrete steps towards ERA'; Advice paper entitled 'LERU roadmap for research data'; 'LERU – Open for business' brochure; Advice paper 'Good practice elements in doctoral training'; Advice paper 'Online learning at research-intensive universities'; Support for an exception for TDM in the response to the copyright consultation and support given to the report of the TDM Expert Group. Open letter calling on Elsevier to withdraw its current TDM policy; Statement expressing disappointment about the EC´s attempts, during the WIPO´s negotiations, to block future discussions of copyright law to aid libraries and archives to fulfil their missions in the digital environment.

Organisation or participation in several meetings:

Fringe sessions on 'How research partnerships are turning on the innovation growth machine in Europe' and 'The ERA partnership as the backbone of the European innovation ecosystem' at the EC’s 2014 Innovation Convention; Organisation of a seminar on 'Open scholarship'; Participation in the EUA seminar on smart specialisation; Participation in the focus group meeting organised by VERA (Forward Vision on the ERA project) to discuss possible future scenarios and strategies for ERA; Participation in the Working Group IDT Principles under the Steering Group for Human Resources and Mobility; Organisation of the LERU Doctoral Summer School on research integrity in Helsinki; Participation in the ERA SHO platform  meetings,  in the group developing a European Charter for access to RIs and, as an observer,  in the Task Force meetings.

Contribution to the ERA Newsletter

Monitoring:

Several surveys of LERU members. Among them, the survey on ERA priorities in 2013, a survey on the development of tenure-track systems, a survey on the classification of researchers and a survey on the impact of gender measures in 2014.

Other activities:

Since 2013, collaboration with the EIT Foundation programme to place graduate students and recent PhDs for internships in industry since 2013; LERU universities were encouraged to publish their vacancies in the Euraxess Jobs Portal. Creation of a LERU Community of Vice-Rectors for Enterprise and Innovation in 2013; Creation of the LERU legal portal to give access to all the legal publications from LERU members which are available in open access; 3.6.5. NordForsk Launching of transnational and jointly funded research programmes in fields and topics that are highly relevant to society. These programmes are based on open calls, peer review and a common-pot principle. Adoption of a renewed grant agreement for Nordic Centres of Excellence (NCoE), requesting that project results are made public as soon as possible and in accordance with the projects’ publication and dissemination plan. In addition, the new grant agreement emphasizes open recruitment and open advertisement of vacancies. Emphasis on open access to research data in its funding and support to broaden cooperation within all its programmes.

Independent evaluations:

NordForsk’s cross-border cooperation based on common-pot funding: results demonstrate the importance and added value of the NCoE funding scheme. The Top-level Research Initiative on Climate, Energy and the Environment (TRI): preliminary results demonstrate that a Nordic platform for successful future cooperation has been created. Researcher mobility: results provide a basis for understanding patterns and trends of researcher mobility across the Nordic region, different types of incentives and obstacles promoting and inhibiting such mobility.

Monitoring:

Monitoring the progress in connection with ERA priorities by conducting a survey of the NCoEs funded by the TRI in 2013.

Facilitation activities:

Creation of a joint research agenda on Arctic research in the Nordic countries in 2013. Discussion and debate at a global level on topics highly relevant to societies. Division of tasks and labour in the Nordic countries by executing the first call of the Joint Programming Initiative, JPI Climate, together with the French agency ANR. Discussions on priorities and joint Nordic actions by offering a platform for research infrastructure cooperation since 2013. Assessment of Nordic Universities’ performance by bibliometric analysis. 3.6.6. Science Europe Adoption of the Science Europe Roadmap in December 2013. The roadmap sets out Science Europe’s strategic priorities on a number of key ERA-related topics. The roadmap provides Science Europe with a plan and methodology to make evidence-based contributions to the strengthening of European research systems. Launch of nine Science Europe working groups: Cross-border Collaboration; Open Access to Research Publications; Research Data; Research Careers; Research Infrastructures; Research Integrity; Research Policy and Programme Evaluation; Gender and Diversity; and H2020. Work plans have been, or are being, developed, and work is already underway. Priority areas for 2014 include, but are not limited to: safe havens for data;, inter-sectoral mobility; post-doctoral instruments; strategic priority setting for RIs; research integrity policies and awareness raising tools. These activities are complemented by the work of the six Scientific Committees, for example work by the Medical Sciences Committee on ‘big data’, and the Humanities Committee Opinion Paper, ‘Open Access Opportunities for the Humanities’. Organisation of the sixth high-level ERA workshop, which took place in February 2014. This brought together Heads of Science Europe Member Organisations, ministerial representatives and EU institutions, as well as representatives of stakeholder partner organisations. This event provided an important platform for high-level dialogue on ERA-related topics and will continue to take place annually. Co-ordination, together with ANR, the French National Research Agency, of the European regional input into the 2014 meeting of the Global Research Council (GRC). This led to a state of play report on Open Access and a ‘Statement of Principles for Shaping the Future: Supporting the Next Generation of Researchers’, which was endorsed by the GRC. Publication of the ‘Practical Guide to Three Approaches to Cross-border Collaboration’. This guide provides information and advice on three optional models of collaboration: MfR; Money follows Co-operation Line and Lead Agency Procedure. It is intended to support Member Organisations which wish to implement these models. Production, in collaboration with Elsevier’s SciVal Analytics, of the report ‘Comparative Benchmarking of European and US Research Collaboration and Researcher Mobility’. The report looks at the impact of international research collaboration in Europe and the US. It shows that – measured in co-authorship – cross-border research collaboration levels in Europe are comparable to collaboration levels across US state borders. It also shows that there is a big advantage to be gained for European researchers who collaborate with non-European colleagues. The report was published in September 2013 and contributes to the evidence base on the topic of cross-border collaboration. Invitation to Science Europe Member Organisations to sign a new ‘Letter of Intent’ to indicate their intention to implement MfR (a model of grant portability), if this is relevant to them. All institutions signing up to this commit to providing publicly-available information on how this is organised in their institution, thus improving the transparency and visibility of MfR. Facilitation of Member Organisations’ input into the consultation on the EU Copyright Directive. Also, continuation of advocacy of Science Europe’s position on the European Data Protection Regulation. Science Europe is also working, in collaboration with partners where appropriate, on the related topics of data and text mining, licensing and copyright and data protection. On the last of these, SE released a Position Statement in May 2013 on the proposed European Data Protection Regulation, calling on the EU to safeguard the needs of the scientific community. This was complemented by an Opinion Paper by the SE Medical Sciences Committee: ‘The Benefits of Personal Data Processing for Medical Sciences in the Context of Protection of Patient Privacy and Safety’, which was followed up by a co-hosted roundtable event in the European Parliament in September 2013. 3.7. Actions in support of ERA by the members of EIROforum

Four of the EIROforum members reported actions in support of the implementation of the ERA actions.

3.7.1.  CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire)

During 2013 CERN contributed to the implementation of all five ERA priorities as identified in the 2012 Communication on completing the ERA:

More effective national research systems

•           In May 2013 CERN Council adopted the updated European Strategy for Particle Physics, which summarises the priorities for Europe in the next decade and is being used as a reference roadmap for particle physics by national funding agencies and by ESFRI.

Optimal co-operation and effective investment and use of RIs

•           Israel became the 21st full member of CERN in January 2014;

•           The High-Luminosity Upgrade of the LHC is currently in the implementation phase, with contributions from USA, Russia and Japan;

•           CERN provides free access to its research facilities for scientists from more than 80 nations, involved in one or more of the many experiments using the accelerator infrastructure of the Organisation.

Open labour market for researchers

•           CERN is working towards obtaining and implementing the EC logo 'HR excellence”;

•           Vacancy notices for all staff positions at CERN, not just Marie Curie fellows, are published on the EURAXESS job portal;

•           CERN has an open and merit based recruitment process (e.g. no national quotas) and a career development system;

•           Positions for Marie-Curie fellows (ITN and CO-FUND) are open to candidates from any country in the world;

•           CERN fellows with a Marie-Curie CO-FUND fellowship may spend up to one year (out of three) in a research institute, university or industrial company of their choice, which facilitates the transition to the next stage of their careers;

•           CERN actively contributes to the Task Force on the establishment of a Pan-European Pension Fund for researchers.

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research

•           The Management of CERN is encouraging institutional changes through the introduction of a diversity programme and discussions on different levels within the Organisation.

Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge

•           CERN plays a leading role in the ongoing implementation of open access for publications in particle physics through the SCOAP3 Open Access publishing initiative, http://scoap3.org/;  

•           CERN continued the development and transfer of digital library technology, as well as Open Access experience, through the FP7 OpenAIREPlus project, notably with the launch of the flagship Zenodo Open Access and Open Data repository. The Open Access pilot in FP7, supported by OpenAIRPlus is expected to be expanded in H2020, with CERN expected to continue to provide the baseline digital Open Access technology;

•           The Organisation supports the promotion of knowledge and technology transfer, including via open source software and open hardware models.

3.7.2.   EMBL (European Molecular Biology Laboratory)

More effective national research systems

•           In 2013 the Nordic EMBL Partnership for Molecular Medicine, which had until then connected institutes of excellence in Norway, Finland and Sweden, was expanded to Denmark. Thus, the EMBL partnership network now comprises national institutes within nine countries and thereby contributes to more effective national systems in life science research;

•           To strengthen research links with institutes in its Member States, in 2013 EMBL entered into several agreements envisaging scientific exchange and collaboration. Recognising the potential for synergism in the field of structural biology, EMBL formalised its scientific links with the Karolinska Institutet, Sweden. Collaboration with the Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, aims to address the scientific opportunities and challenges in the application of structural biology to understand certain human diseases. Last but not least, agreement with the Fonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg will support research projects of the highest quality put forward jointly by Luxemburgish and EMBL researchers.

Optimal co-operation and effective investment and use of RIs

•           EMBL is contributing towards cooperation and effective investment and use of RIs across the ERA by expanding its membership. In 2013 the EMBL Council endorsed the membership of the Czech Republic. In 2013 Malta also submitted an application to become an EMBL Member State. This will be on the agenda of the EMBL Council in summer 2014;

•           In 2013 the EMBL Council adopted a policy on prospect membership to facilitate the integration of the molecular biology community in Europe. The aim of the policy is to attract countries from Central and Eastern Europe to join EMBL and thereby encourage better integration of life science research in Europe. Prospect membership of EMBL is of a transitional character and offers broad access to EMBL facilities and services with no financial cost. This policy was welcomed by several European countries and in February 2014 the Slovak Republic became the first EMBL prospect Member State;

•           In 2013 EMBL revised its associate membership scheme to further foster the development of mutually beneficial research cooperation activities with non-European states. As a result, in 2013 the EMBL Council approved an application from Argentina to become an associate Member State. Australia has been an EMBL associate Member State since 2008;

•           Progress in coordinating national investment in RIs has also been noticeable in ELIXIR and Euro-BioImaging. In 2013 ELIXIR moved into its implementation phase following the entry into force of the ELIXIR Consortium Agreement, which has since been signed by nine European countries and EMBL. In 2013 Euro-BioImaging presented a MoU which is a first formal step towards establishing this RI. Thus far the Memorandum has been signed by eleven countries and EMBL.

Open labour market for researchers

•           In 2013 EMBL was conferred with the EC’s 'Excellence in research' logo in recognition of its progress in implementing the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for Recruitment of Researchers. EMBL developed a strategy and an action plan, which incorporates the C&C;

•           EMBL has remained committed to advertising vacancies on EURAXESS, implementing a merit based recruitment process, launching career development initiatives etc.

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research

•           During 2013 EMBL management encouraged institutional change through actions of different working groups and discussions on gender equality at different levels within the organisation. An example of one such action was the guidelines drawn up to ensure applications from suitable female candidates during the recruitment of group leaders.

Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge

•           EMBL continuously implements open access (a case in point are the bioinformatics services), provides digital research services and encourages different initiatives with the industry. In addition, Europe PubMed Central, maintained at EMBL-EBI and supported by more than 20 funding organisations, provides free access to life sciences and biomedical research publication information, to enable innovation through use of literature, including text mining, and to facilitate and provide integration of related research data;

•           EMBL encourages knowledge transfer via its own technology transfer company.

3.7.3. ESO (European Southern Observatory)

More effective national research systems

•           Continuation of ESO’s Scientific Instrumentation devolution policies based on a consortia of national institutes (often in different countries) developing advanced scientific instrumentation for ESO’s observational facilities;

•           Continual discussions with a number of countries in Europe and beyond with an interest in joining the organisation;

•           Providing help (expertise) to non-ESO ESFRI projects;

•           Establishment of an ESO Council strategy working group to elaborate ESO’s role in the wider astronomy and astrophysics landscape in Europe and beyond, including structural relations with major non-ESO undertakings.

An open labour market for researchers

•           Open merit based and transparent recruitment: already in place, a review of the recruitment process and tool took place to facilitate applications of PhD candidates, fellows and researchers;

•           Other areas (competence framework, performance evaluation for researchers, career development and specific training) are now integrated into the ESO Fellowship programme, etc. and will be implemented in 2014.

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research

•           Encouraging institutional change through presentations, working groups and discussions at different levels within the organisation;

•           Giving priority to gender equality in the recruitment process, in particular for researchers and engineers;

•           Follow-up on gender issues identified in our staff engagement survey;

•           Focus on gender issues in our regular review of employment conditions  (maternity leave, parental leave, Kinderkrippe/Kindergarden, part time/flexible working time, etc.). 

3.7.4. ESRF (The European Synchrotron Radiation Facility)

More effective national research systems

The ESRF is the only international synchrotron in the world. Most of the contracting parties of the ESRF also have their own national synchrotron facilities, complementary to the ESRF, which continually benefit from the experience and expertise of the ESRF via numerous collaborations. 

Optimal co-operation and effective investment and use of RIs

In May 2013, South Africa signed a medium-term arrangement with the ESRF becoming the 20th country to join the European synchrotron. In August 2013, Israel renewed its Scientific Association with the ESRF for a further 5 year period (2014-2018) with an increased level of financial contribution.

In 2013, the ESRF published a detailed report on the socio-economic impact of the ESRF – 'Impact of the ESRF and its Upgrade Programme'.[1]

Phase I of the ESRF Upgrade Programme (2009-2015), representing an investment of EU 165 million, paves the way to a new generation of beam lines and the substantial improvement of the reliability, stability and brilliance of the synchrotron source and X‐ray instruments. It is now close to completion and is being delivered on time and within budget. The second phase of the ESRF Upgrade Programme (UP Phase II) is currently being elaborated with users, external experts and the ESRF funding bodies. ESRF UP Phase II represents EUR 150 million of new investment during 2015-2020 centred on an enhanced X-ray source that reduces the horizontal spread or 'emittance' of the ESRF’s beams to unprecedented low values. The implementation of Phase II will allow Europe to maintain leadership in synchrotron research for the foreseeable future by enabling new science and the development of new technologies to the benefit of our society.

An open labour market for researchers

The ESRF advertises its open positions widely and continues to use the EURAXESS portal for this purpose. It accepts applications from candidates of all nationalities.

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research

In September 2012 the ESRF Management and Unions signed an agreement on gender equality. This agreement has been fully implemented and provides, for example, and amongst others:

•           the yearly production of statistics on gender balance (e.g. ensure that the proportion of male/female new recruits reflects as closely as possible the respective proportion present in the applications received);

•           that at least one woman is present on recruitment panels;

•           that in the case where a male candidate is preferred for a position for which there were also female candidates, a written argumentation be made in the final recruitment proposal to management, providing the reasons, based on objective and neutral criteria, for the choice of that candidate.

4. Final remarks 4.6.1. Progress in policy support is constantly observed

The Commission could identify, together with Member States, that a variety of actions have been taken since 2013. Error! Reference source not found. below summarises the type of overall actions in the EU.

Table 1: Number of initiatives taken by Member States since last year’s ERA Progress Report.

Type of initiative || Since 2013 || Of which in 2014

Law || 33 || 10

Plans (including Action Plans) || 14 || 5

Programme (incl. funding programme) || 49 || 19

Schemes || 11 ||

Non-legal action || 12 || 1

Strategies || 60 || 25

Other type || 44 || 6

The areas where more measures could be identified are, by order of importance 'knowledge transfer and open innovation', 'open access', 'competitive funding' and 'financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI'. The number of measures identified in 2014 is still low (see Table 2).

Table 2: Number of measures adopted (or being adopted) by area of intervention

|| Since 2013 || Of which in 2014

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review || 23 || 3

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment || 18 || 5

Implement joint research agendas || 9 || 8

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes || 9 || 5

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions || 2 || 2

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional RIs of pan-European interest || 23 || 5

Access to RIs of pan-European interest || 4 || 3

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender || 3 ||

Gender balance in decision making process || 19 || 5

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research || 24 || 8

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors || 48 || 7

Uptake of federated electronic identities || 3 || 1

4.6.2. ERA national policies lead to ERA implementation

Some of the results[2] presented in this report are summarised in Map 1[3]. It shows that overall ERA is well implemented.

Map 1: Classification of Member States according to their policies in support of ERA and their implementation

Source: DG RTD

The results also suggest that there is not a single path to ERA. The implementation of ERA above the EU average is in some cases directly driven by funders and RPOs (bottom-up), whilst in some other cases by national and regional policies (top-down). In the cases where in implementation is below the EU average, further efforts seem to be required by RPOs and in some cases also by national and/or regional authorities.  

5. Annexes 5.6. Assessment of the ERA indicators

5.7. Methodology for clustering the RPOs (2014 ERA survey)

This section presents the characteristics of the ERA survey and the methodology used to cluster RPOs according to their ERA compliance.

5.8. The 2014 ERA survey

The second ERA survey is the continuation of the first survey of RPOs in the ERA launched in 2012, to identify the implementation status of the different ERA priorities. Only public research organisations (universities, institutes, hospitals, research agencies, etc.) or organisations under private law with a public mission were concerned.

The 2014 questionnaire was drafted by an Expert Group taking advantage of the experience acquired in the previous exercise as well as contributions from national representatives. The resulting 2014 questionnaire is a simplified version of the previous one and mainly gathers information to estimate indicators agreed with Member States. It also introduces the possibility of answering 'not applicable' to the questions to reflect the fact that sometimes they cannot implement the ERA actions because they do not correspond to their mandate or institutional characteristics. A new organisation category, Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs), with distinctive, mission-oriented R&D objectives, was also included. The questionnaire was administered on-line through a dedicated webpage created on the European Commission ERA website. Launched on 28 February 2014, it was closed on 9 April 2014. In many cases the organisations were contacted after the closure to validate some of the information provided.

The survey addresses specific issues linked to the ERA priorities: institutional assessment for funding; RIs, open labour market for researchers; gender issues and knowledge circulation. Questions regarding transnational co-operations with EU countries were not considered in the 2014 survey in order to reduce the response burden. Therefore, a quantitative and statistical comparison with the results of the first survey cannot be carried out. However, a qualitative study based on some common items is possible.

The Commission received 1,265 responses by RPOs in 2014 (this number is not far from the 1,374 received in 2013 after removal of duplicates, incomplete, wrong and unreliable records). The representativeness of the data is estimated to be 31.6% when considering the total number of staff (headcount) of the research organisations at EU level (it was equal to 31.2% in the 2012 survey). However, only around one third (471) of the RPO responded to both surveys.

The data was collected in textual or numerical format, transformed and recoded into a numeric format to be analysed with statistical software packages.

In terms of the geographical distribution of RPO respondents in 2014, it appears that some countries participated better than in 2012 (the most notable being Germany, Austria and Estonia) while it was the opposite in the case of Poland, Belgium, Italy. However, for most of the countries, these numbers remain quite stable (although, as mentioned above, they may be not the same organisations). Among the ACs, a high number of responses were received from Turkey.

In terms of representativeness of the answers from funders, their total budget represents around 34% of total GBAORD in the EU (see Graph 1). However, the analysis by country shows figures above 100% of GBAORD. This is explained by the fact that the figures provided also include the budgets dedicated to education.

Graph 1: Representativeness of fs when compared with national GBAORD 2012.

 

Source: Eurostat (GBAORD) and ERA survey 2014 (Research funders budget)

The importance of funding managed by national funders among all funders who responded to the survey is shown in Graph 2. The high level of funding managed by German funders affects the estimation of EU averages. Besides, the table shows the limited participation in the total budget of the four cases which declared budgets above the 100% of GBOARD.

Graph 2: Share of total funding managed by responding funders, by country

It should be noted that the denominators used for the estimation of the EU averages include (very limited) amounts of funding dedicated to education.

Concerning RPOs, respondents to the survey gather around 20% of the total research population in the EU. Graph 3 shows the important share of researchers in the case of France and Germany.

Graph 3: Representativeness of RPOs in terms of total researchers in the country

The representativeness of the survey in terms of share of national researchers is important in Germany, France, Spain and Italy, which affects the EU average (notably by the German institutions) (see Graph 4).

Graph 4: Share of country’s researchers among the total number of researchers in responding RPOs

5.9. Clustering RPOs according to ERA compliance

The responses to the survey can be used to group the organisations according to their different propensity towards the implementation of ERA actions. One possible methodology is to undertake a multivariate analysis. This type of statistical analysis enables the simultaneous representation of the variables and/or the cases of a dataset in order to synthesize the information (aka, the variance) of the sample (Di Franco 2001, 181). Usually, multivariate analysis requires an adequate number of variables (at least 3, but more than 4 are generally recommended) and cases (many suggest at least 20 cases per variables), otherwise results might not be statistically significant. Considering the objective of the analysis goal and the categorical and ordinal nature of the majority of the variables in the dataset, the 'French way' to conduct multivariate analysis (Benzecrì, 1973; Di Franco, 2006; Greenacre & Blasius, 2006; Holmes, 2007), was adopted. The  most common procedure of this approach consists of two multivariate techniques applied in sequence: first an MCA (multiple correspondence analysis, similar to a factor analysis, but applied to categorical data) to synthesize many variables into single factors; then  a clustering method in order to group the cases according to MCA outcomes.

The responses to the survey were used to carry out basic univariate statistics. Variables with too many missing values, too high redundancy or unbalanced distributions were excluded from the analysis. Those remaining were used for a descriptive multidimensional (i.e. multivariate) analysis using factorial and clustering methods to group the organisations according to their propensity towards the implementation of the ERA actions. The variables retained are: Funding based on assessment by the funding organisation, Running and/or funding RIs; Research vacancies advertised on Euraxess; Minimum requirements for recruitment included in the vacancies announcement; adoption of the C&C principles; Adoption of innovative doctoral training principles; Adoption of GEP; Inclusion of gender dimension in research content; Open access for data; Presence of a structure for knowledge transfer activities; Provision of federated electronic identity; Provision of cloud services, Provision of other digital research services; Number of publications per researcher.

The main results of the multivariate analysis are:

The first factorial plane in Graph 5 shows how the variables (issued from the questions) contribute to the factor formation. The most informative parts in this plane are the lower-half and the right-half regions (the left-half corresponding mainly to organisations replying 'not applicable').

Graph 5: Variables projected onto the first factorial plane F1-F2

NB: Dots represent organisations

As depicted in the first factorial plane, through clustering techniques three clusters can be identified. They are labelled as: 'Limited compliance to ERA' (Cluster 1, in Graph 6); 'ERA compliance' (cluster 2); 'Not applicable” (cluster 3).

Graph 6: First factorial plane with organisations identified by size and jointly projected with patents.

NB: The circles represent positions of the centres of mass of the clusters. Their sizes are proportional to the cardinals of each cluster.

It should be noted that the inclusion of an organisation in a cluster does not necessarily mean that it fits the 'expected' profile of the cluster perfectly, i.e. if an organisation is included in the 'ERA compliance' cluster, it does not mean that this organisation fully implements all the ERA priorities. Its inclusion in the 'ERA compliance' cluster means that this organisation has a similar pattern of answers to other organisations which show a high propensity towards ERA. The same applies for the other clusters.

Cluster 1, labelled 'Limited compliance to ERA', gathers 565 organisations which show a limited propensity towards the implementation of ERA. Their implementation (occasionally) appears to be confined to few ERA actions. From a statistical point of view, this cluster is characterised by low percentages of organisations implementing some actions such as: occasional implementation of 'advertising on Euraxess' (6.9% of the organisations belonging to this cluster); 'C&C principles' (9.6%); 'GEP' and 'inclusion of gender dimension' (about 20% when averaging the two corresponding scores); a moderately better situation regarding 'funding based on assessment' (36.5%); 'minimum requirements in vacancy announcements' (44.2%); 'existence of a structure for knowledge transfer' (30.4%); 'provision of federated electronic identity'; 'provision of cloud services'. The proportion of 'not available' responses for 'innovative doctoral training' is high (45.3% of organisations in the cluster).

                                                   

Cluster 2, called 'ERA compliance', gathers 501 organisations which appear to be more inclined to implement ERA actions. The profile of an 'ERA compliant' organisation is characterised by the implementation (often frequently) of the majority of the variables used for the cluster analysis. From a statistical point of view, this cluster can be described by: a large majority (about or more than 80%) of organisations replying 'yes' or 'frequently' to the effective implementation on 'minimal requirements for researcher’s recruitment', 'structure for knowledge transfer'; a rather high percentage (about 2/3 or higher) for 'funding based on assessment', 'running/funding RIs', 'implementation of the C&C principles', 'adoption of GEP', adoption of innovative doctoral training principles'; a mixed picture for 'vacancies advertised on Euraxess' (50.7%), 'inclusion of gender dimension in research contents' (47.7%), 'provision of federated electronic identity' (55.3%), 'provision of other digital services' (48.1%); a modest performance for 'open access for data' (27.5%) and 'provision of cloud services' (38.9%).

Cluster 3, called 'ERA not applicable', gathers 199 organisations. This cluster is the most difficult to describe because the organisations which indicated that the implementation of ERA is 'not applicable' according to their mandate. In other words, the organisations belonging to this cluster do not find an appropriate answer to the majority of the questions. The statistical analysis shows that, most often, the answer 'not applicable' represents the higher percentage of responses such as 'advertised on Euraxess', 'minimum requirements included in the vacancy announcement', 'implementation of the C&C principles, 'adoption of GEP'; however, for some questions the 'not available' percentage of responses is the highest, such as 'adoption of innovative doctoral training principles' (59.3%) and 'provision of federated electronic identity' (44.2%).

Although the cardinal (i.e. the number of organisations) of the cluster 'Limited compliance to ERA' (565) is slightly higher than the one of 'ERA compliance' (501), the latter represents 80.6% of the total number of researchers, while the former only 16.5%. The 'not applicable' cluster gathers the remaining 2.9%.

The RTOs and 'others' represent respectively 179 and 214 organisations. If the RTOs show a relatively balanced distribution in the two above clusters (keeping the same order of presentation 81 and 65), the 'other' category is mainly concentrated in the 'Limited compliance to ERA' cluster (114) and very few (26) in the 'ERA compliance' cluster. Hospitals, museums, libraries are included in the 'other' category of respondents.

The size of the organisations is an important factor regarding the extent to which they are actively engaged in adopting and implementing ERA actions; larger organisations in the sample appear to be more compliant. High ratios are observed for instance regarding the 'funding based on assessment by the funding organisation' for universities larger than 1000: 97 responding 'yes' in the cluster 'ERA compliance' out of a total of 108. For 'running and/or funding RIs', while the 'yes' is balanced between the two clusters 'Limited compliance to ERA' and 'ERA compliance' (21 and 22 respectively) for research organisations less than 100, these values are very different (respectively 20 against 76) when the size is bigger than 100. The same figures are observed for 'advertised on Euraxess': they are even more pronounced with 99 responses 'frequently' out of a total of 105 for universities larger than 1000.

It should be stressed that the three clusters do not discriminate against organisations according to 'positive' and 'negative' implementation of the ERA actions. There are always organisations that respond negatively or positively in each cluster. For instance, 44.2% of the organisations in 'Limited compliance to ERA' replied 'frequently' to the question on minimal requirements (to be compared however to the 85.6% of the 'ERA compliance' cluster). The same observation can be made for innovative doctoral training where implementation is respectively undertaken by 28.7% and 73.1% of the organisations. In terms of adoption of a gender equality plan 18.9% of the organisations in the 'Limited compliance to ERA' cluster answered 'yes' while 75.2% replied 'no' (62.1% and 30.5% respectively in the 'ERA compliance' cluster). In other words, the clusters show a trend more toward ERA implementation than a strict frontier between the two groups. This is also true for the 'not applicable' cluster, although at a much lower level.

Regarding the distribution per country, it appears that the number of organisations in the 'Limited compliance to ERA' surpass the 'ERA compliance' in the majority of countries. Half or almost half of organisations belonging to countries such as Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Ireland and Slovakia are clustered in the 'Limited compliance to ERA'. The countries whose majority of organisations belong to the 'ERA compliance' cluster are, amongst others, Italy, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Norway and Switzerland. The only country where there is a large difference is Germany: 83 organisations out of127 are classified in the 'ERA compliance' cluster (10 being in the 'Not applicable' cluster). However, the situation changes radically when the analysis is done with respect to the number of researchers in the organisations. In this case, only four countries have a majority of organisations in the 'ERA compliance' cluster.

5.10. Matching ERA policies with ERA implementation

In order to provide a synthetic view of the previous analysis and reflect the overall ERA compliance, policy and implementation indexes were built up. In situations where policy for the ERA priority was identified, the country was given a mark of one, whereas, when policies were not identified, the country was given a mark of zero. In situations where the implementation of the ERA action is above the EU average, the country was given a mark of one, and vice versa, when the implementation was below the EU average, the country was given a mark of zero.

Table 3 presents the ERA areas which were considered in this assessment. The domains related with the open labour market for researchers are not included as the analysis is presented in the relevant section of this report.

For example, a country in which there is a strategy in place to support the implementation of a joint research agenda and the share of funding to joint research agendas is above the EU average, the country received a mark of 1 in terms of policy support and 1 in terms of implementation. In cases where there is no strategy but the share of funding is above the EU average, the country received a mark of 0 and 1, respectively.

Table 3: Score given for each domain of activity to the policy support and to the implementation by funders or performers

For each country, the total scores are added up, independently of the fact that there is a matching between policy and implementation.

The following graphs compare the situation across Member States. Eight Member States have adopted policies in more than of the 10 areas mentioned above (see Graph 7).

Graph 7: Number of areas in which policy has been adopted in the different Member States.

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit

Note: Results on the open labour market for researchers are not included in this graph.

The number of areas where implementation is above the EU average is lower than in the previous case. For example, only in three countries (and they are not always the same) it can be observed an implementation above the EU average in ten 10 areas (see Graph 8).

Graph 8: Number of areas in which implementation by Member State is above the EU average.

5.11. How to analyse the results of the survey in the country fiches

Annex 5.1 presents the indicators that were agreed with Member States. Among the list, 35 are being included either in the Country snapshot or in the relevant section in the Country fiches.

The results in the current version are presented in the form of tables with the following headings:

Indicator || Level/ cluster || Value || Year || Source

The level/cluster column indicates the following possibilities:

For the case of funders, there are two values: National (the result observed at national level) and EU (the result observed in the average at EU level). For the case of RPOs, there are up to four values: the results observed at national level, presented according to the degree of ERA compliance of RPOs (ERA compliant, Limited Compliance and ERA not applicable) and the result observed at EU level only for the cluster 'ERA compliant' (it can be recognised by the title 'ERA compliant at EU level'.

In the publishable version of the report, the results will be presented in a graphic format.

For the snapshots, the following indicators where retained:

Indicator || Rationale

GBAORD || Government budget appropriations or outlays on R&D (GBAORD) are all appropriations allocated to R&D in central government or federal budgets and therefore refer to budget provisions, not to actual expenditure. Provincial or state government should be included when its contribution is significant. GBAORD measures government direct support to R&D activities.

GBAORD per capita || The indicator presents Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays on R&D normalised by population in order to allow for the comparison of spending efforts related to the population of a country.

GBAORD/GDP || The indicator GBAORD as a % of GDP shows how much priority government gives to the public funding of R&D in the economy.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || The indicator GBAORD as a % of total government expenditure shows how much priority government places on the public funding of R&D.

R&D tax incentives (as a share of GBAORD) || Tax incentives for R&D are a form of indirect support for R&D. It is a market-based tool aimed at reducing the marginal cost of R&D activities. It reflects the willingness of a government to give up revenues in the short-term in order to foster R&D in the private sector.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project funding || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD allocated to a group or an individual to perform a R&D activity limited in scope, budget and time, normally on the basis of the submission of a project proposal describing the research activities to be done.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD which is allocated to institutions with no direct selection of R&D project or programmes to be performed. Under this type of funding, it is the receiving institution that has discretion over the R&D projects that are to be performed, not the funding organisation.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || The indicator presents the share of GBAORD which is allocated to transnational cooperation activities. It includes the contributions to transnational public R&D performers; Europe-wide transnational public R&D programmes and bilateral or multilateral public R&D programmes established directly between Member State governments. It reflects the importance given by the government to collaboration and sharing of experiences in R&D across borders, whether national, regional or organisational, as an effective way to access new ideas, innovative approaches and new skills.

Number of researchers (headcount) || Researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems and also in the management of the projects concerned. Head count data corresponds to the total number of researchers employed by the public and private sectors.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (headcount) || The indicator presents the total number of researchers as a share of active population.

Non-EU doctorate students as a percentage of all doctorate students || This indicator presents the share of non-EU doctorate students among all doctoral students measure in headcounts at a particular point in time. It reflects the openness of the education system to students from outside the EU.

Share of women researchers (headcount) || It addresses gender balance among researchers.

Share of women PhD graduates (% based on headcount) || It presents gender balance after PhD graduation. Compared with the share of women researchers, the different represents the degree of utilisation (in the country) of potential female scientists

Share of women senior researchers (% based on headcount) || This indicator addresses gender balance in senior research positions. It can be compared with the share of women researchers as a proxi for the openness of the national public research system for career progression of women researchers.

Share of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (% based on headcount) || This indicator highlights gender balance in leading positions. It can be compared with the share of women researchers as a proxi for the capacity of the national public research system to ensure career progression for women.

Publications by researcher || The indicator has been estimated using the total number of publications in international publications databases and the total number of researchers in the country. Publications are research articles, reviews, notes and letters published in referenced journals which are included in the Scopus database of Elsevier. A full counting method was used at the country level. However, for the EU aggregate, double counts of multiple occurrences of EU Member States in the same record were excluded. Source: Scopus (Elsevier); treatments and calculations: Science Metrix.  It measures the scientific productivity of the national research system.

Co-publications within the EU by researcher || EU transnational co-publications refer to international co-publications which involve at least one author from an EU country. This category includes both co-publications by authors from at least two different EU Member States (as defined by research papers containing at least two authors' addresses in different countries) and co-publications between one or several authors from the EU together with at least one author from a country outside the EU. It has been estimated using the total number of EU transnational co-publications and the total number of researchers in the country. It is a proxy to analyse the degree of openness of the national system to collaborate within Europe.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher || Extra-EU co-publications is a sub-category of the broader EU transnational co-publications. It refers exclusively to international co-publications involving at least one EU author and at least one non-EU author, as defined by the authors' addresses in different countries. The indicator has been estimated using the total number of Extra-EU co-publications and the total number of researchers in the country. It is a proxy to analyse the degree of openness of the national system to collaborate with researchers working in institutions located outside Europe.

PCT patent applications by researcher || The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an international treaty, administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), signed by 133 Paris Convention countries. The PCT makes it possible to seek patent protection for an invention simultaneously in each of a large number of countries by filing a single “international” patent application instead of filing several separate national or regional applications. Indicators based on PCT applications are relatively free from the "home advantage" bias (proportionate to their inventive activity, domestic applicants tend to file more patents in their home country than non-resident applicants). The granting of patents remains under the control of the national or regional patent offices. The national distribution of patent applications is assigned according to the inventor's country of residence. If one application has more than one inventor, the application is divided equally among all of them and subsequently among their countries of residence, thus avoiding double counting. The indicator has been estimated using data computed by Bocconi University (Italy), based on WIPO-PCT applications and PATSTAT database for the number of patent applications and Eurostat for the number of researchers (number of patent applications per country/number of researchers in the same country). In general, patent applications can be filed by researchers and non-researchers. However, data is not available on the occupation of the inventor. Therefore, this proxy is presented to compare the effectiveness of national research systems in terms of PCT patent applications.

5.12. Glossary

2010 European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap[4]: the ESFRI Roadmap identifies new RIs of pan-European interest corresponding to the long term needs of the European research communities. It covers all scientific areas, regardless of possible location.

Applied research: applied research is an original investigation undertaken in order to acquire new knowledge. It is, however, directed primarily towards a specific practical aim or objective (Source: OECD, 2002).

Assessment or evaluation procedure (within the context of funding allocation): evaluation procedure which analyses the entire institution in terms of input, throughput (processes) and output factors. Among the latter, the assessment may include research performance and may be linked to funding allocation. Salaries and other staff costs are not included in the assessment.

Associate country to the EU Framework Programme (AC): several countries are associated with the implementation of the EU 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. These include Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland and Turkey.

Basic (fundamental) research: basic research is experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of underlying foundations of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view (Source: OECD, 2002).

Cloud services: services to remotely deliver computing and storage capacity to end-users.

Collaboration programmes (within the context of international cooperation): programmes whose activities have been agreed on or arranged by the national agency and agencies of one or more third countries aimed at promoting collaboration in research between organisations or individuals from these countries.

Collaborative agreement: an agreement between two or more legal entities to co-invest in the R&D of products or processes. 

Computing services: services enabling researchers to use local or remote computing resources, offered, for example, by High Performance Computers, or distributed grid- or cloud-based computing infrastructures. For example, PRACE and EGI support the development and provision of these services in the EU.

Dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities: number of employed people engaged in KT activity.

Digital research services: examples of digital services include scientific repositories, computing services, cloud services (from external provider), scientific software, research collaboration platform, etc.

European Union (EU): economic and political union of 28 Member States. EU countries namely: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

EU countries: countries which are part of the EU. These include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

EU Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development: the EU's main instrument for funding research in Europe. It provides grants to research actors in Europe and beyond, in order to co-finance research, technological development and demonstration projects. Grants are determined on the basis of calls for proposals and a peer review process.

EURAXESS portal[5]: a service which provides information and services to mobile researchers.

European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers[6]: aims to ensure that the nature of the relationship between researchers and employers or funders is conducive to successful performance in generating, transferring, sharing and disseminating knowledge and technological development, and to the career development of researchers. It outlines a set of general principles and requirements which specifies the roles, responsibilities and entitlements of researchers as well as those of employers and/or researcher funders. The Code of Conduct for the recruitment of researchers consists of a set of general principles and requirements that should be followed by employers and/or funders when appointing or recruiting researchers. The principles are complementary to those in the European Charter for Researchers.

European Research Council (ERC)[7]: the mission of the ERC is to encourage the highest quality research in Europe through competitive funding and to support investigator-initiated frontier research across all fields of research, on the basis of scientific excellence.

Evaluation: process of evaluating after completion, the outcome, results and impacts of projects, programmes and/or research agendas.

Federated electronic identity: federated identity allows researchers to use their own organisation user account when accessing other organisations' digital services.

Full Time Equivalent (FTE):  a unit to measure employment, taking into account work load of individual persons (average number of hours worked per week). An FTE of 1 means that the person is equivalent to a full-time worker, while an FTE of 0.5 signals that the worker works only half-time.

Gender balanced committee/panel: a committee/panel is considered gender balanced when the percentage of members of the under-represented sex is at least 40%. In cases of committees/panels with only three members, these committees are considered ‘gender balanced’ if they are represented by both sexes.

Gender dimension in research content: making gender a dimension of research by integrating it as part of the research design and process. This entails sex and gender analysis being integrated into basic and applied research.

Gender equality (GE): also known as sex equality or sexual equality. It is the goal of equality of genders. GE entails making women's rights equal to men's, and making men's rights equal to women's.

Gender equality plan (GEP): a GEP is a consistent set of provisions and actions aiming at ensuring GE.

Grant: research specific grant, with funding associated with setting up a medium- and/or long-term research programme. The term 'grant' used in this survey does not include grants to doctorate candidates for short-term mobility.

Head of organisation: highest decision making official in the organisation (e.g. rector or equivalent in the academy, president or equivalent in non-academic research organisations).

Headcount: headcount data measures the total number of persons who are fully or partially employed by an organisation.

Human Resources (HR) Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R): it supports research institutions and funding organisations in the implementation of the Charter & Code (C&C) in their policies and practices.[8]

Innovation: the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (goods or services) in the market, or implementation of new or significantly improved processes or a new organisational or marketing method, never used before.

Institutional funding: general funding of institutions with no direct selection of R&D project or programmes. There are various formulae for the allocation of institutional funding that consider, to a lower or higher extent, the research performance. In some cases, institutional funding includes a quota related to number of staff, students etc. (Source: OECD, 2011).

International organisation: an international organisation arises from an association of states. It is established on the basis of a treaty or similar act and has an international legal personality distinct from that of its Member States. It has an international membership, scope, or presence.[9]

Joint research agendas: annual or multiannual research agendas for a joint programme between EU Member States outside the framework of the EU Framework Programme. Joint research agendas include activities such as JPIs and ERA-Net+ where the bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.

Knowledge transfer (KT): the process of transferring the rights to use and exploit knowledge from one source. It is transferred to those in a position to best exploit it in placing new products and services on the market.

Lead agency: this procedure foresees that research councils accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries (e.g. DE, AT, CH).

Leading researcher: internationally recognised researcher (e.g. team leader, in management positions, full professor, etc.).

Legal status: the relative position or standing of an organisation in the eyes of the law.

Licence held: all licenses, options and assignments for all types of IP (count multiple (identical) licences with a value of less than EUR 500 as one licence).[10]

Licence income: total income from all types of know-how and intellectual property (patents, copyright, designs, material transfer agreements, confidentiality agreements, plant breeder rights, etc.) before disbursement to the inventor or other parties. It includes license issue fees, annual fees, option fees and milestone, termination and cash-in payments. It excludes licence income forwarded to institutions other than those served by the KT office or to companies.

Money-Follows-Cooperation Line: this scheme allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country (overhead costs are, however, excluded).

Money-Follows-Researcher (MfR): this scheme enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives.

National identification number: a unique number allocated to organisations or individuals for the purposes of work, taxation, government benefits, health care, and other government-related functions. The equivalent of the national identification number for private organisations is the value added tax identification number.

Non-governmental sector: the non-governmental sector includes organisations which are neither a part of a government nor conventional for-profit businesses.

Open access: refers to the practice of granting free access to research outputs over the internet, most notably peer-reviewed publications and research data.

Organisation under private law with public mission: refers to a public sector body or a legal entity governed by private law with a public service mission[11].

Patent: an exclusive right granted by a government authority (typically a patent office) for an invention, which is a product or a process that provides a new way of doing something or offers a new technical solution to a problem. In order to be patentable, the invention must fulfil certain conditions[12].

Patent application: an application made to a government authority (typically a patent office) to have a patent granted for invention. An invention  is a product or a process that provides, in general, a new way of doing something or offers a new technical solution to a problem.  In order to be patentable, the invention must fulfil certain conditions[13].

Peer review: the evaluation of research proposals by independent external experts, based on transparent evaluation criteria communicated in advance. Peer review can be based on a group of principles such as excellence, impact, quality and efficiency of the project implementation[14].

Peer reviewed scientific publications: original empirical or theoretical piece of work in sciences which are subject to the scrutiny of peers. These peers are experts in the same field. The peer review process takes place before the paper is published in a journal.

PhD graduate: an individual who earned a doctoral diploma, having successfully completed a PhD programme.[15]

PhD candidate: an individual who attends a PhD program in order to obtain a PhD diploma.

Portability of grants: situation in which a researcher who moves to a different country may transfer an on-going grant.

Post-doc: a postdoctoral research candidate has completed doctoral studies and intends to further deepen expertise in a specialised subject.

Principles for innovative doctoral training[16]: the principles include research excellence, attractive institutional environment, interdisciplinary research options, exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors, international networking, transferable skills training and quality assurance.

Private organisation without a public mission: a firm or company in the private (non-public) sector of an economy whose main aim is to generate profit, which is controlled and operated by private individuals (and not by civil servants or government-employees) and is not accountable to governmental organisations[17].

Project-based funding: funding attributed on the basis of a project submission by a group or individuals for an R&D activity that is limited in scope, budget and time (Source: OECD, 2011).

Public sector: includes the government and higher education sectors but excludes public-sector corporations who are part of the business enterprise sector, as defined in the Frascati Manual. The higher education sector may include private and public corporations as well as private not-for-profit organisations as defined in the System of National Accounts (Source: OECD, 2011).

R&D personnel: persons employed directly on R&D as well as those providing direct services such as R&D managers, administrators, and clerical staff (Source: OECD, 2002).

Recruitment committee: no matter how they are designated (e.g. by nomination, election, pool), recruitment committees are set for the recruitment of one or more persons when there is an open position (at any level temporary or permanent).

Repository: electronic archive for the storage of academic publications such as peer reviewed scientific articles.

R&D budget (for RFOs): the estimation of the total amount of funds (or revenue and expenses) handled by the organisation for the purpose of funding R&D activities.

R&D budget (for RPOs): the estimation of the total amount of funds (or revenue and expenses) handled by the organisation for the purpose of performing and funding R&D activities. It should include overheads but not funding for teaching activities.

Research and experimental development (R&D): research and experimental development comprise creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase both the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications (Source: OECD, 2002).

Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs): mission-oriented providers of innovation services to governments and firms, dedicated to improving quality of life and building economic competiveness.[18]

Research collaboration platform: a collaboration platform which gathers scientific resources, tools, data and work management facilities to enable remote collaboration and exchanges between researchers on a specific research topic or working as a research team.

Research data (within the context of open access to research data): data collected, observed or created for the purpose of analysis to produce original research results.[19]

Research evaluation committees: these are responsible for the evaluation of research projects and programmes as well as performance at the institutional or individual level. The outcome of the evaluation may be linked to the allocation of research funding and/or other resources.

Research infrastructures (RIs): an RI comprises facilities, resources and related services used by the scientific community to conduct top-level research in their respective fields. Examples include singular large-scale research installations, collections, special habitats, libraries, databases, biological archives, integrated arrays of small research installations, high-capacity/high speed communication networks, highly distributed capacity and capability computing facilities, data infrastructure, etc.

Researcher: a professional engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems and also in project management. Postgraduate students at the PhD level engaged in R&D should be considered as researchers (OECD, 2002). 

Scientific software: software for specific scientific tasks, such as modelling and visualisation of data, or operating specific virtual laboratory experiments. This kind of software can be installed in one institution and also accessed remotely by researchers from other institutions.

Structure for KT activities: a structure in place which facilitates or incentivises KT. This could be a formal Knowledge/Technology Transfer Office or dedicated staff.

Structured innovative doctoral training programmes: these apply all the principles for innovative doctoral training. The principles include research excellence, attractive institutional environment, interdisciplinary research options, exposure to industry and other relevant employment sectors, international networking, transferable skills training and quality assurance[20].

Total number of staff: the total number of employees in an organisation.

Young researcher: a researcher who is at the beginning of his/her career. This includes first stage researchers (up to the point of PhD), post-docs and junior researchers.

SOURCES

OECD (2011): OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011: Innovation and Growth in Knowledge Economies[21]

OECD (2005): Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd Edition[22]

OECD (2002): Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, Frascati Manual 2002[23]

World Intellectual Property Organisation

5.13. Concepts used in the analysis of national policy context in support of ERA

PROJECT-BASED FUNDING IN THE COUNTRY

The allocation of public research funding is typically done via two mechanisms: allocation of funding through open calls for proposals (also known as project-based funding) and institutional funding. Project-based funding is attributed on the basis of a project submission by a group or individuals for an R&D activity that is limited in scope, budget and time. One example is the EU Framework Programme which allocates public funding via open calls for proposals.

USE OF CORE PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL PEER REVIEW

When evaluating open calls for proposals, a rigorous peer review process using the international principles should be in place. The evaluation of research proposals should be carried out by independent external experts based on transparent and evaluation criteria communicated in advance. The problem is that there is no consensus on the core principles of international peer review. In agreement with the Julia in the survey we indicated that: Peer review can be based on a group of principles such as excellence, impact, quality and efficiency of the project implementation. This reflects the criteria used at EU level in the Framework Programme.

INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING BASED ON INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT

Institutional funding refers to general funding of research institutions (incl. universities) with no direct selection of R&D projects or programmes. It can be bulk funding based on past figures (e.g. number of staff/PhD candidates, past funding budgets). In other cases, funding allocation can be based on research performance. Performance-based institutional funding means that the quality of research-performing organisations, their teams and their output is assessed and constitutes the basis for institutional funding decisions. In some case, a 'formula' is used for calculating the funding (for example, in some countries a mix between number of PhD candidates, disciplines and publications is used). For the purpose of the survey, the following definition was used: Assessment or evaluation procedure: evaluation procedure which analyses the entire institution in terms of input, throughput (processes) and output factors. Among the latter, the assessment may include research performance and may be linked to funding allocation. Salaries and other staff costs are not included in the assessment.

JOINT PROGRAMMING INITIATIVES (JPIs)

Research efforts can be essential to address major societal challenges. In some cases these are so great that national research programmes cannot tackle them effectively on their own. Yet, the vast bulk of research programmes in Europe are run in isolation, leading to unwanted fragmentation or ineffectiveness. Joint programming aims to remedy this situation.

The overall aim of the joint programming process is to pool national research efforts in order to make better use of Europe's precious public R&D resources and to tackle common European challenges more effectively in a few key areas.

It is a structured and strategic process whereby Member States agree, on a voluntary basis and in a partnership approach, on common visions and Strategic Research Agendas (SRA) to address major societal challenges. On a variable geometry basis, Member States commit to JPIs where they implement together joint SRAs.

What is of utmost importance is that MSs express how they participate in JPI activities. Only presenting the funding volume allocated to a joint call or in RIs is not enough. Ideally, they should indicate how the participation in JPIs is reflected in their national programming landscape (alignment).

The JPI is a vehicle to increase common funding principles, mutual peer review recognition, international joint peer review etc. That is why there are less important criteria for the assessment, and hierarchically the JPI participation of a MS should be assessed first.

Pour mémoire, there are 10 JPIs: Neurodegenerative diseases (JPND); Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change (FACCE); Healthy diet for a healthy life (Diet and Health JPI); Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe; Healthy Ageing – More Years, Better Lives (Demographic Change); Anti-Microbial resistance; Water Challenges for a Changing World; Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans; JPI Climate and Urban Europe.

Alignment can be characterised as:

The strategic approach taken by Member States’ programming authorities to modify their national programmes and activities as a consequence of the adoption of joint priorities at EU level Public-public partnerships (for example the Strategic Research Agendas of JPIs).

Alignment is gradual and very hard to detect and the assessment to what extent a MS aligns its national programmes towards a JPI should at this stage remain at the level of what strategies/programmes/action plans are in place for participation in a JPI.

Joint strategic research agendas: annual or multiannual research agendas for a joint programme between EU Member States outside the framework of the EU Framework Programme. Joint strategic research agendas are the basis of JPIs, ERA-Nets or other joint programmes where the bulk of funding does not come from EU sources.

ARTICLE 185 INITIATIVES

Article 185 TFEU (ex Article 169 TEC) states that: 'In implementing the multiannual framework programme, the Union may make provision, in agreement with the Member States concerned, for participation in R&D programmes undertaken by several Member States, including participation in the structures created for the execution of those programmes.'

In practical terms, Article 185 TFEU foresees the participation of the EU in the joint implementation of (parts of) R&D national programmes. The participating EU Member States integrate their research efforts by defining and committing themselves to a joint research programme, based on the voluntary integration of scientific, managerial and financial aspects. The EU provides financial support to the joint implementation of the (parts of the) national research programmes involved, based on a joint programme and the setting-up of a dedicated implementation structure.

ERA-NETS

ERA-Nets are an FP instrument for the coordination of national and regional research programmes through joint activities such as joint calls for trans-national proposals. Under FP7, ERA-NET Plus provided additional EU financial support to facilitate joint calls for proposals between national and/or regional programmes.

H2020 essentially merged the ERA-NET and ERA-NET Plus instrument into a single new instrument called ERA-NET Co-fund.

OTHER JOINT RESEARCH AGENDAS

These concern bi- or multilateral agreements or programmes in place among EU-MS and AC.

MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF EVALUATIONS THAT CONFORM TO INTERNATIONAL PEER-REVIEW STANDARDS

Mutual recognition or (Lead Agency Procedure) of each other’s peer review implies that the national funding agencies have signed an agreement or MoU that regulates this procedure. If a national funding agency cedes the right to nationally evaluate its project proposals to another agency, it recognises the peer review of the other agency and bases its funding decision on it. This can sometimes be a one way process only and this is not mutual recognition. Mutual recognition will be easier if funding agencies apply similar peer review standards, e.g. international peer review.

COMMON FUNDING PRINCIPLES TO MAKE NATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAMMES COMPATIBLE, INTEROPERABLE (CROSS-BORDER) AND SIMPLER FOR RESEARCHERS

This goes more into the technicalities of what measures and procedures funding agencies have put into place to implement cross-border activities. We are not interested in cross-border activities that are based on EC-co-funded activities (ERA-Net, Article 185) because there the Commission requires them anyway in order to harmonise their rules.

By common funding principles we mean:

•           Definition of priorities (calls, programmes);

•           Eligibility criteria;

•           Standards for proposal evaluation;

•           Selection decisions;

•           Definition of eligible costs;

•           Funding rates;

•           Reporting requirements;

•           Intellectual property rights issues.

PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES INCLUDED IN THE ESFRI ROADMAP

ESFRI, the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures, is a strategic instrument to develop the scientific integration of Europe and to strengthen its international outreach. The competitive and open access to high quality RIs supports and benchmarks the quality of European scientists' activities and attracts the best researchers from around the world.

The mission of ESFRI is to support a coherent and strategy-led approach to policy-making on RI in Europe; and to facilitate multilateral initiatives leading to the better use and development of RIs, at EU and international level.

The ESFRI Roadmap identifies new RIs of pan-European interest corresponding to the long term needs of the European research communities, covering all scientific areas, regardless of possible location.

Potential new RI (or major upgrade) identified are likely to be realised in the next 10 to 20 years. Therefore, they may have different degrees of maturity but it should be noted that they are supported by a relevant European partnership or intergovernmental research organisation. A growing number of countries have prepared national roadmaps that establish the prioritisation of national and pan-European RIs, using the ESFRI Roadmap as a reference. This helps to define national budgets, facilitates political support and enables long-term financial commitment.

PARTICIPATION IN ERICS

The Community legal framework for a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) entered into force on 28 August 2009. This specific legal form is designed to facilitate the joint establishment and operation of RIs of European interest. On 2 December 2013, the Council adopted the Council Regulation EU n° 1261/2013 amending the Regulation EC 723-2009 concerning the ERIC. The participation of countries associated to the EU research framework programmes in ERICs is now on the same footing as EU Member States. Their contributions to ERICs will be fully reflected in terms of membership and voting rights. The regulation entered into force on 26 December 2013.

NATIONAL ROADMAPS LINKED TO ESFRI

RIs play an increasingly important role in the advancement of knowledge and technology. They are a key instrument in bringing together a wide diversity of stakeholders to look for solutions to many of the problems that society is facing today. RIs offer unique research services to users from different countries, attract young people to science and help to shape scientific communities.

Types of RIs: The term ‘research infrastructures’ refers to facilities, resources and related services used by the scientific community to conduct top-level research in their respective fields, ranging from social sciences to astronomy and genomics to nanotechnologies. Examples include singular large-scale research installations, collections, special habitats, libraries, databases, biological archives, clean rooms, integrated arrays of small research installations, high-capacity/high speed communication networks, highly distributed capacity and capability computing facilities, data infrastructure, research vessels, satellite and aircraft observation facilities, coastal observatories, telescopes, synchrotrons and accelerators, networks of computing facilities, as well as infrastructural centres of competence which provide a service for the wider research community based on an assembly of techniques and know-how. RIs may be ‘single-sited’ (a single resource at a single location), ‘distributed’ (a network of distributed resources), or ‘virtual’ (the service is provided electronically).

These key infrastructures have not only been responsible for some of the greatest scientific discoveries and technological developments, but are also influential in attracting the best researchers from around the world and in building bridges between national and research communities and scientific disciplines.

The list of available national roadmaps can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=esfri-national-roadmaps

ACCESS TO RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES OF PAN-EUROPEAN INTEREST

Member States may have taken actions to ensure access to their national RIs.

The Commission has also been supporting access to effective RIs for researchers all over Europe for more than a decade. This action has been instrumental in enhancing European researchers' access to the infrastructures they require to conduct their research, irrespective of the location of the facility.

It is now possible to see on an interactive map the location of RIS  that open their doors to all researchers in Europe. This map

 (http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=mapri)

 shows the location of the RIs funded under the Seventh Framework Programme that provide transnational access to researchers. These infrastructures form part of networks supported through Integrating Activity projects with a view to making the most of existing facilities by optimising their use for the benefit of the scientific communities.

GENDER

All MSs comply with the EU directives on equal opportunities and equal treatment. In general MSs transpose the EU legislation in the general national legislation related to the labour market, according to their national legal system, (it might be an Equality Act, a Gender Equality Law or another type of legislation).

In terms of implementation of EU legal provisions, employers of researchers, as with any other employer, must comply with the EU legislation on equal opportunities and equal treatment. The main directive (2006/54)  covers the implementation of these principles in employment and occupation, including equal pay for equal work or work of equal value, vocational training, promotion and working conditions, occupational social security schemes, returning after maternity leave and paternity leave. It also provides for positive action. Furthermore, the Council Directive (96/34/EC)  lays down minimum requirements on parental leave designed to facilitate the reconciliation of parental and professional responsibilities for working parents for all workers, men and women, who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined by the law, collective agreements or practices in force in each MS.

The aim of the present analysis is to focus on public research thereby giving a picture of national provisions and initiatives relating to GE in this sector, including related indicators.  This is done by assessing three groups of actions at national level:

•           Specific actions (SAs) for the implementation of the EU directives in the specific sector of public research;

•           Positive actions (PAs) providing specific advantages in order to make it easier for the under-represented sex to pursue a vocational activity or to prevent or compensate for disadvantages in professional careers within the public research sector;

•           Additional actions (AAs) to achieve GE in R&D. These actions are not covered by the EU directives on GE in the labour market. They address institutional changes in the public research sector in order to correct gender inequalities and ensure GE. They also cover actions relating to the integration of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.

 FOSTER CULTURAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE ON GENDER

In terms of policy at the national level, we need to pay attention if MSs have the following additional actions:

•           Specific laws/acts regulating GE in public research, for instance as those in AT, ES, NO, FR (since 2013) and BE (Walloon region);

•           Acts/incentives stimulating or obliging RPOs to explicitly set up GEPs; for instance the laws on GE in ES, AT and NO, performance agreements in AT, Athena Swan in the UK, the Finnish Equality Act covering educational institutions such as universities;

•           Strategies (i.e. guidelines, charters/codes, awards, etc.) at the national/ministerial or at the regional level for GE in RPOs. For instance the UK Athena Swan award, the AT performance agreements and the NO GE Award.

CAREERS –WORKING CONDITIONS IN PUBLIC RESEARCH

Concerning researchers’ careers and their working conditions, the possibilities could be:

•           SAs implementing or facilitating the implementation in public research of the EU directives covering maternity leave (2006/54) and parental leave (96/34) and support given to researchers’ careers to cope with career breaks and facilitate  re-entry;

•           Access to funding is a key element of researchers’ career. In almost all countries statistical evidence exists of higher success rates for men in access to research funding than for women. Therefore, the analysis could look at the existence of provisions to ensure a balanced participation of women and men in research programmes/projects at national or regional level, or at the level of RFOs, such as NordForsk;

•           Positive Actions targeting women, such as incentives given to RPOs for the recruitment and promotion of female researchers (i.e. 'Excellentia programme' in AT, Federal Programme for Female Professors in DE, additional chairs awarded if a certain benchmark is reached in DK, BALANSE Programme in NO, ASPASIA Programme in NL) and actions to support women researchers individually (i.e. awards such as the L’Oreal Prize, fellowships). It’s important to check if these incentives are provided at the national/regional, level or by RFOs and other funders.

GENDER BALANCE IN PUBLIC RESEARCH DECISION MAKING

Several measures can help to address gender imbalances in decision making processes. In particular they concern the setting up of quotas and targets in decision making bodies of RPOs by national or regional authorities:

•           Quotas in decision making bodies of RPOs;

•           Targets in decision making bodies of RPOs.

GENDER DIMENSION IN RESEARCH CONTENT/PROGRAMMES

This entails the integration of sex and/or gender analysis in research content:

•           Gender dimension (GD) is integrated in research content/programmes. If yes, it’s important to check at which level GD is integrated. For example, in 2013 NordForsk adopted a new funding policy requiring GD to be explicitly mentioned (hence evaluated) in the research proposals where relevant; the Irish Research Council in 2013;

•           There are dedicated budgets/programmes for women/gender studies.

OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICATIONS AND DATA RESULTING FROM PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH

 Open access can be defined as the practice of providing on-line access to scientific information (please note that term 'scientific' refers to all scholarly disciplines) that is free of charge to the user and is re-usable. In the context of R&D, 'scientific information' can refer to (i) peer-reviewed scientific research articles (published in scholarly journals) or (ii) research data (data underlying publications, curated data and/or raw data). The general guideline is that the Commission mandates open access (OA) for publications and encourages OA to data, although it is not prescriptive in how the Member States achieve OA, e.g. via the green or the gold route for publication or via hard or soft law.

(i) OA to scientific publications refers to free of charge online access for any user. Legally binding definitions of 'open access' and 'access' in this context do not exist, but authoritative definitions of OA can be found in key political declarations on this subject (Budapest Declaration (2002), Berlin Declaration (2003)). There are two main routes towards OA to publications:

A.        Self-archiving (also referred to as 'green' OA) means that the published article or the final peer-reviewed manuscript is archived (deposited) by the author - or a representative - in an online repository before, alongside or after its publication. Repository software usually allows authors to delay access to the article (‘embargo period’).

B.        OA publishing (also referred to as 'gold' OA) means that an article is immediately provided in OA mode as published. In this model, the payment of publication costs shifts away from readers, paying access via subscriptions. The business model most often encountered is based on one-off payments by authors. These costs (often referred to as Author Processing Charges, (APCs)) can usually be borne by the university or research institute to which the researcher is affiliated, or to the funding agency supporting the research. In other cases, the costs of OA publishing are covered by subsidies or other funding models.

(ii) OA to research data refers to the right to access and re-use digital research data under the terms and conditions set out as a formal obligation. Openly accessible research data can typically be accessed, mined, exploited, reproduced and disseminated free of charge to the user. Please note that 'Research data' refers to information, in particular facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered as a basis for reasoning, discussion or calculation. In a research context, examples of data include statistics, results of experiments, measurements, observations resulting from fieldwork, survey results, interview recordings and images. The focus is on research data that is available in digital form.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER AND OPEN INNOVATION

OI is the emerging paradigm for innovation, involving business models that use partnering, licensing and venturing to combine internal and external sources of ideas and technologies (DG Enterprise). In its truest sense it is the open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. It helps to create and share knowledge. The central idea behind OI is that, in a world of widely distributed knowledge, companies cannot afford to rely entirely on their own research, but should instead buy patented processes or other inventions from other companies. In addition, internal inventions not being used in a firm's business should be taken outside the company (e.g. through licensing, joint ventures or spin-offs).

KT: involves the processes for capturing, collecting and sharing explicit and tacit knowledge, including skills and competence. It includes both commercial and non-commercial activities such as research collaborations, consultancy, licensing, spin-off creation, researcher mobility, publication, etc. While the emphasis is on scientific and technological knowledge, other forms such as technology-enabled business processes are also concerned (DG Enterprise). In the ERA survey the following definition was used: KT is the process of transferring the rights to use and exploit knowledge from one source. It is transferred to those in a position to best exploit it in placing new products and services on the market.

KT as a 3rd pillar: The OI/KT expert group report (2014) refers to the triple helix concept which puts entrepreneurial universities at the heart of the innovation ecosystem. It describes how the potential of innovation and economic development in a knowledge society lies in a more prominent role for universities and the hybridisation of elements from university, industry and government to generate new institutional and social formats for the production, transfer and application of knowledge. KT can be specific as a 3rd pillar in the policies/strategies or KT can form part of an innovation strategy.

POLICIES FOR PUBLIC E-INFRASTRUCTURES AND ASSOCIATED DIGITAL RESEARCH SERVICES

Public e-infrastructure

E-Infrastructure is a technical infrastructure that makes digital research services possible, such as:

•           High-speed network infrastructure (GEANT) (check whether the country has a research and education network at

 http://www.geant.net/About/partners/Pages/Home.aspx);

•           Computational infrastructures (high-performance, grid and cloud computing);

•           Grid computing: which applies the resources of many computers in a network to a single problem;

•           Cloud computing, and cloud services in particular, offer the research and education (R&E) sector huge opportunities to both maximise effectiveness and reduce the capital investment and development time for projects. They offer the R&E community a number of key benefits: •Reduced capital costs; •Reduced support costs; •The ability to leverage purchasing power across the community; •Easier remote access for collaborative projects and users; •Scalability. By utilising shared and off-the-shelf services for commodity activities, the R&E community can refocus its design, development and support resources into those fields that cannot be easily provided by the commercial sector. However, together with these benefits there are risks associated with security, data integrity and reliability which need to be addressed when selecting and purchasing cloud services;

•           Data infrastructures (data repositories, data services, authentication and authorisation infrastructure, digital authors identification, data object identifiers).

DIGITAL RESEARCH SERVICES

Digital research services make reference to computing services, cloud services, scientific software (e.g. for simulation and visualisation), research collaboration platforms, virtual laboratories and remote instrumentation.

•           Collaboration support: this includes network collaboration tools, such as Voice over IP and group collaboration services; provision of networked e-Science resources, including cloud resources; e-learning; interaction with NREN clients and relatively new areas of broker services and software development;

•           Cloud services: see above (collaboration support);

•           Research collaboration platforms: if you are interested in the topic, check http://www.terena.org/publications/files/TERENA-Compendium-2013.pdf pages 67-85;

•           Premium service means consultancy and security audits, but not NREN service implementation support.

FEDERATED ELECTRONIC IDENTITIES

Cross-organisational researcher identity (federated identity): Digital authentication and authorisation in a cross-organisational manner, i.e. the possibility to use the user account in one (home) organisation to access services in another organisation.

Identity Management System: (ldM), a system that combines technologies and policies to allow institutions to store users’ personal information and keep it up to date. An ldM is the first step to providing authentication and authorisation infrastructure -  a term used for systems supporting the process of determining both (1) whether users are who they declare themselves to be (authentication) and (2) that they have the appropriate rights or privileges necessary to access a resource (authorisation) - for a local or federated environment.

eduGAIN is intended to simplify the movement of people and data between federations, providing all the resources that researchers need. NRENs will offer a greater range of services to their users, delivered by multiple federations in a truly collaborative environment; and service providers will offer their services to users in different federations.

5.14. Sources of information

Official sources:

Eurostat

Total GBAORD by NABS 2007 socio-economic objectives:

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do;jsessionid=9ea7d07d30dee944cfc4811346f498c4da83635b2550.e34OaN8PchaTby0Lc3aNchuNa3qOe0

Extracted on 14.03.14

Total GBAORD as a % of total general government expenditure [gba_nabste]

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsc00007&plugin=1

Extracted on 23.04.14

Total GBAORD by funding mode

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=gba_fundmod&lang=en

Extracted on 14.05.14

National public funding to transnationally coordinated R&D

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=gba_tncoor&lang=en

Extracted on 23.04.14

Share of women researchers, by sectors of performance

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsc00005&plugin=1

Graduations in ISCED 3 to 6 by field of education and sex

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=educ_grad5&lang=en

Extracted on 19.06.14

Population on 1 January by age and sex [demo_pjan]

Extracted on   23.04.14

Other sources

 Mathieu Doussineau, Elisabetta Marinelli, Mariana Chioncel, Karel Haegeman, Gérard Carat, Mark Boden, ERA Communication Synthesis Report, European Commission JRC-IPTS, 2013

Researcher’s Report 2014

She figures, 2012 

http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she-figures-2012_en.pdf

Bibliometrics

European Commission - Analysis and monitoring of national research policies Unit, based on information provided by Science-Metrix (Scopus).

Patents

European Commission - Analysis and monitoring of national research policies Unit, based on information provided by University Bocconi.

5.15. Results of the survey by country

|| ERA compliant || Limited  compliance to ERA || ERA not applicable

 Share of organisations which implement open access for data || 27.5 || 29.6 || 35.7

Share of organisations which implement cloud services || 38.9 || 17.9 || 11.6

Share of organisations which consider the gender dimension in research content || 47.7 || 21.8 || 27.6

Share of organisation which advertise their research vacancies on Euraxess || 50.7 || 6.9 || 3.5

Share of organisations which provide federated electronic identity to their researchers || 55.3 || 33.8 || 22.1

Share of organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || 62.1 || 18.9 || 16.1

Share of organisations which have adopted the Charter and Code principles || 62.3 || 9.6 || 13.6

Share of organisations whose institutional funding is based on performance assessment by the funding organisation || 64.3 || 36.6 || 25.6

Share of organisation which implement innovative doctoral training || 73.1 || 28.7 || 15.1

Share of organisations which have a structure to promote knowledge transfer || 79.8 || 30.4 || 20.6

Share of organisations which include minimum requirements when publishing research vacancies || 85.6 || 44.2 || 24.6

|| Project Based funding || Institutional funding based on institutional assessment || Institutional funding not based on institutional assessment

AL || 70.0 || 0.0 || 30.0

AT || 49.0 || 15.3 || 0.4

BA || 67.0 || 0.0 || 33.0

BE || 45.9 || 46.2 || 6.9

BG || 80.0 || 0.0 || 20.0

CH || 98.7 || 0.0 || 1.3

CY || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

CZ || 53.2 || 45.4 || 1.2

DE || 56.9 || 42.2 || 0.0

DK || 77.1 || 22.6 || 0.2

EE || 89.4 || 5.5 || 0.0

EL || 75.5 || 0.0 || 24.5

ES || 64.6 || 0.4 || 33.5

FI || 91.5 || 0.0 || 8.4

FO || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 89.2 || 1.6 || 9.1

HR || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

HU || 82.4 || 0.0 || 17.6

IE || 78.8 || 1.6 || 12.1

IL || 99.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 51.4 || 35.7 || 12.9

LT || 47.1 || 25.2 || 27.7

LU || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 81.4 || 18.5 || 0.0

ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

NL || 89.2 || 7.8 || 2.9

NO || 81.4 || 13.3 || 5.3

PL || 92.0 || 6.8 || 0.0

PT || 79.7 || 8.9 || 0.0

RO || 97.9 || 0.0 || 0.0

SE || 81.4 || 15.2 || 2.5

SI || 24.9 || 7.9 || 33.8

SK || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

UK || 80.0 || 20.0 || 0.0

|| Share of funding allocated to joint research agendas (RFO)

AL || 0.0

AT || 1.9

BA || 0.0

BE || 2.6

BG || 0.0

CH || 0.0

CY || 0.7

CZ || 0.6

DE || 0.8

DK || 16.3

EE || 0.1

EL || 0.9

ES || 0.1

FI || 5.3

FO || 0.0

FP || 0.0

FR || 5.3

HR || 0.0

HU || 0.0

IE || 0.3

IL || 0.0

IS || 2.0

IT || 1.9

LI || 0.0

LT || 0.1

LU || 10.0

LV || 0.9

MD || 0.0

ME || 0.0

MK || 0.0

MT || 28.5

NL || 9.2

NO || 1.0

PL || 2.0

PT || 3.8

RO || 3.0

RS || 0.0

SE || 2.8

SI || 0.7

SK || 0.0

TR || 0.0

UK || 0.9

|| Share of funding allocated to international cooperation (%)

AL || 0.0

AT || 0.2

BA || 0.0

BE || 0.2

BG || 0.0

CH || 1.7

CY || 0.0

CZ || 1.1

DE || 4.3

DK || 2.0

EE || 0.0

EL || 1.0

ES || 0.5

FI || 1.6

FO || 0.0

FR || 2.6

HR || 0.0

HU || 0.0

IE || 0.0

IL || 0.0

IS || 0.0

IT || 0.4

LT || 0.5

LU || 0.0

LV || 0.9

ME || 0.0

MT || 0.0

NL || 2.1

NO || 2.7

PL || 1.4

PT || 2.5

RO || 0.8

SE || 1.1

SI || 0.7

SK || 0.0

UK || 1.9

|| Share of funding received from abroad by RPOs

AL || 0.08

AT || 1.08

BA || 0.00

BE || 0.02

BG || 3.95

CH || 0.85

CY || 3.37

CZ || 0.01

DE || 1.22

DK || 1.36

EE || 0.00

EL || 1.98

ES || 1.08

FI || 0.65

FO || 0.00

FP || 0.00

FR || 0.20

HR || 0.66

HU || 8.44

IE || 4.02

IL || 0.00

IS || 0.68

IT || 0.25

LI || 0.00

LT || 0.55

LU || 0.00

LV || 0.88

MD || 0.00

ME || 0.00

MK || 0.00

MT || 0.00

NL || 0.52

NO || 1.48

PL || 0.40

PT || 0.09

RO || 0.14

RS || 1.94

SE || 1.57

SI || 0.00

SK || 0.54

TR || 0.30

UK || 3.01

|| Funding support to the implementation of gender balance (%)

|| Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable

AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 60.2 || 35.4 || 0.0 || 4.0

BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

BE || 78.5 || 6.7 || 12.4 || 2.4

BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

CH || 93.6 || 2.7 || 0.0 || 3.6

CY || 26.3 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 0.0

CZ || 0.2 || 57.3 || 30.5 || 9.5

DE || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

DK || 22.4 || 0.0 || 21.1 || 56.5

EE || 0.0 || 0.0 || 39.3 || 60.7

EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.1 || 1.9

ES || 76.0 || 0.9 || 13.4 || 9.6

FI || 36.7 || 0.0 || 8.9 || 54.4

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 2.8 || 0.0 || 80.8 || 16.4

HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

HU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

IE || 45.3 || 0.0 || 25.9 || 4.6

IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 0.0

IT || 94.0 || 0.0 || 3.3 || 2.7

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 0.0 || 44.1 || 55.9 || 0.0

LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

LV || 7.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.5

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 95.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.0

NL || 95.3 || 3.6 || 0.0 || 0.6

NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6

PL || 61.4 || 0.0 || 38.6 || 0.0

PT || 3.6 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5

RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 99.9

RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SE || 75.7 || 3.8 || 17.1 || 3.3

SI || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

UK || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.2 || 0.3

|| Gender Equality Plans adopted by RPO (%)

|| Adopted || Not adopted || Not applicable

AL || 98.5 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 89.8 || 8.7 || 0.7

BA || 0.0 || 31.8 || 54.0

BE || 58.2 || 13.5 || 2.6

BG || 11.4 || 42.5 || 15.9

CH || 96.4 || 1.3 || 0.0

CY || 9.0 || 89.1 || 1.2

CZ || 26.3 || 23.3 || 9.1

DE || 95.7 || 2.0 || 0.1

DK || 45.2 || 4.5 || 0.4

EE || 0.0 || 84.8 || 2.4

EL || 27.4 || 57.9 || 9.6

ES || 61.4 || 30.4 || 2.4

FI || 90.4 || 6.7 || 0.0

FO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 91.7 || 4.5 || 2.9

HR || 4.1 || 17.0 || 4.4

HU || 39.1 || 54.3 || 3.0

IE || 28.7 || 50.4 || 0.0

IL || 94.3 || 5.6 || 0.0

IS || 97.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 47.4 || 34.9 || 2.1

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 16.8 || 11.3 || 31.3

LU || 4.0 || 96.0 || 0.0

LV || 2.5 || 29.5 || 10.8

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 99.6 || 0.0 || 0.4

NL || 83.0 || 3.0 || 0.1

NO || 71.6 || 8.5 || 8.8

PL || 19.4 || 50.9 || 2.7

PT || 4.4 || 79.2 || 10.3

RO || 19.0 || 27.3 || 48.8

RS || 12.1 || 55.1 || 1.8

SE || 99.0 || 0.8 || 0.1

SI || 10.8 || 31.3 || 1.6

SK || 2.0 || 67.1 || 17.1

TR || 10.0 || 51.5 || 18.3

UK || 89.8 || 1.4 || 1.5

|| Implementation of recruitment and promotion practices by RPO (% RPO weighted)

AL || 100.0

AT || 78.6

BA || 0.0

BE || 56.5

BG || 6.3

CH || 91.0

CY || 22.2

CZ || 46.2

DE || 89.9

DK || 34.3

EE || 15.0

EL || 30.1

ES || 30.3

FI || 74.9

FO || 0.0

FP || 0.0

FR || 57.3

HR || 12.2

HU || 78.7

IE || 49.0

IL || 99.9

IS || 92.1

IT || 24.3

LI || 0.0

LT || 19.8

LU || 4.0

LV || 63.3

MD || 0.0

ME || 0.0

MK || 0.0

MT || 100.0

NL || 92.7

NO || 83.1

PL || 34.1

PT || 14.3

RO || 38.1

RS || 9.3

SE || 78.8

SI || 55.3

SK || 9.2

TR || 11.3

UK || 86.6

|| Support to the inclusion of gender contents in research agendas by funders (%)

|| Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable || No answer

AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 40.2 || 53.5 || 1.9 || 4.0 || 0.4

BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

BE || 0.0 || 45.9 || 44.7 || 9.0 || 0.3

BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9

CH || 9.3 || 0.0 || 3.7 || 87.1 || 0.0

CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3 || 0.0

CZ || 0.0 || 0.0 || 87.8 || 3.8 || 8.4

DE || 24.6 || 74.6 || 0.0 || 0.7 || 0.0

DK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 67.1 || 32.9 || 0.0

EE || 0.0 || 0.0 || 42.4 || 57.6 || 0.0

EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

ES || 1.7 || 0.2 || 83.5 || 9.7 || 5.0

FI || 31.1 || 0.0 || 8.9 || 54.4 || 5.6

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

FR || 0.0 || 5.9 || 93.8 || 0.2 || 0.0

HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

HU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IE || 7.3 || 0.0 || 63.9 || 4.6 || 24.2

IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 94.0 || 0.0 || 6.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

LT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

LV || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.6 || 0.0 || 0.0

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

ME || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 95.0 || 5.0 || 0.0

NL || 20.0 || 4.3 || 75.2 || 0.0 || 0.6

NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6 || 0.0

PL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

PT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 63.4 || 33.0 || 3.6

RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

SE || 16.8 || 17.5 || 61.4 || 4.2 || 0.0

SI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

UK || 0.0 || 0.1 || 3.7 || 2.6 || 93.6

|| Inclusion of the gender dimension in research contents (% RPO)

|| Yes || No || Not known || Not applicable

AL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 69.9 || 10.0 || 7.7 || 12.4

BA || 19.3 || 0.0 || 27.5 || 53.2

BE || 57.8 || 15.6 || 25.9 || 0.7

BG || 23.0 || 45.0 || 14.1 || 17.8

CH || 76.8 || 5.8 || 17.2 || 0.2

CY || 1.3 || 1.3 || 85.1 || 12.3

CZ || 35.2 || 9.4 || 36.1 || 19.4

DE || 62.9 || 9.5 || 14.3 || 13.2

DK || 61.1 || 31.6 || 7.1 || 0.1

EE || 75.2 || 21.5 || 0.0 || 3.2

EL || 4.2 || 59.2 || 3.8 || 32.8

ES || 28.1 || 41.4 || 27.7 || 2.8

FI || 37.8 || 22.9 || 34.1 || 5.1

FO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 50.8 || 27.3 || 6.5 || 15.4

HR || 15.6 || 9.6 || 66.3 || 8.4

HU || 11.4 || 66.8 || 10.3 || 11.5

IE || 45.7 || 49.7 || 3.9 || 0.7

IL || 94.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.7

IS || 75.0 || 22.0 || 3.0 || 0.0

IT || 24.5 || 50.0 || 20.3 || 5.2

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 59.0 || 1.5 || 39.5 || 0.0

LU || 51.0 || 49.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 69.9 || 20.5 || 9.0 || 0.6

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 0.4 || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.3

NL || 47.1 || 10.8 || 42.0 || 0.1

NO || 44.8 || 12.4 || 19.6 || 23.2

PL || 25.1 || 35.1 || 27.4 || 12.4

PT || 65.3 || 28.1 || 1.6 || 4.9

RO || 49.1 || 26.2 || 8.1 || 16.5

RS || 56.3 || 18.3 || 24.2 || 1.3

SE || 52.9 || 18.2 || 4.1 || 24.8

SI || 47.0 || 18.1 || 20.6 || 14.4

SK || 15.1 || 15.3 || 44.9 || 24.7

TR || 31.5 || 29.4 || 1.5 || 37.5

UK || 21.2 || 20.0 || 57.2 || 1.6

|| Support to open access to publications (% RFO)

|| Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable

AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 64.5 || 0.0 || 30.6 || 4.8

BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

BE || 59.5 || 33.8 || 0.0 || 6.7

BG || 0.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9

CH || 92.4 || 0.0 || 4.0 || 0.0

CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3

CZ || 0.0 || 64.5 || 14.1 || 15.6

DE || 18.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 81.7

DK || 88.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.8

EE || 53.2 || 43.7 || 0.0 || 3.1

EL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.9

ES || 74.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 23.7

FI || 46.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 53.8

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 78.1 || 2.4 || 13.0 || 3.0

HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

HU || 0.0 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 22.9

IE || 59.9 || 0.0 || 36.3 || 3.8

IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 25.7 || 43.8 || 28.9 || 1.6

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 0.0 || 99.0 || 0.0 || 1.0

LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 92.4 || 7.1 || 0.0 || 0.5

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 95.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 5.0

NL || 75.8 || 20.0 || 3.6 || 0.0

NO || 88.4 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 11.6

PL || 73.0 || 0.0 || 27.0 || 0.0

PT || 0.0 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5

RO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.9 || 0.1

RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SE || 16.1 || 6.6 || 0.0 || 64.4

SI || 32.8 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 67.2

SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

UK || 99.5 || 0.3 || 0.2 || 0.0

|| Support to open access to data (% RFO)

|| Frequently || Occasionally || None || Not applicable

AL || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

AT || 17.1 || 1.5 || 66.0 || 4.8

BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

BE || 46.1 || 4.7 || 42.2 || 6.7

BG || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 99.9

CH || 8.1 || 0.0 || 87.3 || 0.0

CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 73.7 || 26.3

CZ || 5.8 || 7.3 || 14.1 || 15.6

DE || 18.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 81.7

DK || 45.3 || 44.2 || 0.0 || 0.6

EE || 0.0 || 43.7 || 53.2 || 3.1

EL || 0.0 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 0.0

ES || 5.6 || 0.0 || 82.5 || 10.3

FI || 46.1 || 53.6 || 0.0 || 0.2

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 9.3 || 3.2 || 71.1 || 6.7

HR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

HU || 0.0 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 22.9

IE || 14.6 || 7.3 || 50.1 || 28.0

IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 0.3 || 0.0 || 99.7 || 0.0

IT || 23.0 || 71.0 || 1.6 || 1.6

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 0.0 || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.6

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 95.0 || 5.0

NL || 21.6 || 0.6 || 66.2 || 11.5

NO || 0.0 || 88.4 || 0.0 || 11.6

PL || 61.4 || 11.6 || 27.0 || 0.0

PT || 0.0 || 33.0 || 62.9 || 0.5

RO || 99.9 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0

RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SE || 42.3 || 0.0 || 46.5 || 8.2

SI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 32.8 || 67.2

SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0

TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

UK || 96.7 || 0.2 || 2.7 || 0.2

|| Support to the implementation of KT and OI (% RFO)

|| Frequently || Occassionally || None || Not applicable || No answer

AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

AT || 43.6 || 38.8 || 15.1 || 2.5 || 0.0

BA || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

BE || 4.9 || 64.7 || 23.7 || 6.7 || 0.0

BG || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

CH || 14.0 || 83.3 || 0.0 || 2.7 || 0.0

CY || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

CZ || 5.8 || 69.2 || 18.5 || 3.7 || 2.8

DE || 74.6 || 4.3 || 0.0 || 21.0 || 0.0

DK || 63.4 || 0.0 || 24.3 || 12.0 || 0.4

EE || 0.0 || 83.0 || 13.9 || 1.4 || 1.7

EL || 0.0 || 98.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.9

ES || 96.8 || 3.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FI || 46.1 || 53.7 || 0.0 || 0.2 || 0.0

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

FR || 16.3 || 3.5 || 68.4 || 11.6 || 0.3

HR || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

HU || 0.0 || 22.9 || 77.1 || 0.0 || 0.0

IE || 76.9 || 7.1 || 12.1 || 3.8 || 0.0

IL || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IS || 0.3 || 99.7 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 25.7 || 74.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

LT || 1.0 || 99.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LU || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 0.0 || 92.4 || 7.1 || 0.5 || 0.0

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

ME || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

MT || 95.0 || 5.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

NL || 99.4 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

NO || 1.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.6 || 88.4

PL || 61.4 || 0.0 || 11.6 || 27.0 || 0.0

PT || 62.9 || 37.1 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

RO || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

RS || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

SE || 41.6 || 13.5 || 41.4 || 0.0 || 3.6

SI || 32.8 || 67.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

SK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

TR || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0

UK || 99.1 || 0.4 || 0.1 || 0.1 || 0.3

|| Presence of TTOs in RPO (% RPO)

|| Have TTO || Use TTO || Does not have || Does not know || TTO not applicable

AL || 98.5 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 1.5

AT || 67.3 || 21.0 || 8.0 || 0.9 || 1.3

BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 41.7 || 0.8

BE || 90.1 || 4.0 || 3.0 || 0.7 || 0.1

BG || 24.4 || 11.9 || 21.4 || 21.4 || 3.3

CH || 95.8 || 1.6 || 2.4 || 0.0 || 0.0

CY || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.3 || 0.0 || 1.6

CZ || 49.5 || 15.0 || 19.6 || 3.3 || 5.7

DE || 72.6 || 10.9 || 11.8 || 0.0 || 0.2

DK || 86.5 || 4.9 || 5.8 || 0.9 || 0.5

EE || 89.3 || 0.0 || 8.6 || 0.0 || 0.0

EL || 63.9 || 0.7 || 10.8 || 0.0 || 0.1

ES || 88.7 || 1.9 || 7.4 || 0.2 || 0.5

FI || 77.5 || 0.0 || 21.7 || 0.0 || 0.3

FO || 0.0 || 0.0 || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 89.0 || 6.8 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 0.3

HR || 74.2 || 11.9 || 8.9 || 1.3 || 0.5

HU || 68.8 || 1.6 || 18.8 || 1.4 || 0.2

IE || 96.7 || 0.9 || 1.7 || 0.0 || 0.7

IL || 10.2 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 5.6

IS || 82.0 || 10.1 || 7.9 || 0.0 || 0.0

IT || 87.5 || 0.9 || 5.6 || 0.2 || 0.1

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 79.7 || 6.8 || 2.9 || 0.0 || 10.6

LU || 94.8 || 0.0 || 5.2 || 0.0 || 0.0

LV || 67.8 || 11.1 || 14.5 || 2.3 || 0.0

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 6.7 || 0.0 || 93.3 || 0.0

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 99.3 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 0.4

NL || 96.0 || 1.9 || 1.6 || 0.4 || 0.1

NO || 62.4 || 12.4 || 6.7 || 3.0 || 4.8

PL || 81.9 || 0.6 || 8.5 || 5.2 || 1.1

PT || 63.2 || 13.7 || 20.6 || 0.1 || 1.6

RO || 72.3 || 4.8 || 15.1 || 2.5 || 4.4

RS || 68.0 || 10.3 || 8.9 || 2.9 || 0.0

SE || 87.9 || 1.9 || 8.1 || 0.8 || 0.1

SI || 55.4 || 0.0 || 16.2 || 18.4 || 4.2

SK || 49.0 || 16.9 || 19.8 || 1.2 || 6.9

TR || 68.9 || 10.0 || 19.9 || 0.0 || 1.2

UK || 90.9 || 1.5 || 3.2 || 0.5 || 0.0

|| Share of RPO according to the number of digital services provided (% RPO)

|| Seven || Six || Five || Four || Three || Two || One || None

AL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 98.5 || 0.0 || 1.5 || 0.0

AT || 3.9 || 26.0 || 11.5 || 9.6 || 37.2 || 8.9 || 0.1 || 2.8

BA || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 14.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 85.8

BE || 10.2 || 55.2 || 1.9 || 4.8 || 1.4 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 26.0

BG || 0.0 || 3.3 || 19.4 || 18.0 || 34.3 || 5.3 || 8.3 || 11.4

CH || 63.1 || 0.5 || 3.3 || 15.0 || 8.7 || 2.6 || 2.9 || 4.0

CY || 8.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 10.6 || 22.2 || 58.1 || 0.0 || 1.1

CZ || 2.1 || 8.3 || 31.8 || 1.3 || 21.0 || 16.6 || 2.8 || 16.2

DE || 32.8 || 22.7 || 23.5 || 8.4 || 3.1 || 1.5 || 0.3 || 7.7

DK || 0.3 || 10.1 || 45.1 || 15.9 || 2.6 || 20.5 || 4.9 || 0.6

EE || 2.4 || 0.0 || 1.1 || 78.7 || 1.3 || 0.8 || 0.0 || 15.8

EL || 17.8 || 0.0 || 0.3 || 10.4 || 38.8 || 2.6 || 3.1 || 26.8

ES || 19.8 || 16.4 || 18.4 || 26.0 || 9.9 || 3.6 || 1.7 || 4.2

FI || 3.7 || 65.2 || 12.9 || 0.0 || 5.3 || 12.0 || 0.2 || 0.7

FO || 100.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FP || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

FR || 1.3 || 16.5 || 10.8 || 4.8 || 2.4 || 0.7 || 52.4 || 11.2

HR || 0.0 || 59.2 || 4.4 || 2.3 || 7.4 || 10.2 || 0.7 || 15.7

HU || 4.1 || 0.0 || 0.6 || 6.8 || 67.1 || 2.7 || 6.0 || 12.6

IE || 68.5 || 0.9 || 26.8 || 0.0 || 2.0 || 1.2 || 0.5 || 0.0

IL || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 15.8 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 84.0

IS || 0.0 || 77.7 || 0.0 || 1.1 || 18.2 || 0.0 || 3.0 || 0.0

IT || 23.3 || 14.6 || 12.8 || 21.5 || 9.5 || 12.1 || 1.2 || 5.1

LI || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

LT || 31.0 || 36.7 || 6.8 || 24.4 || 0.3 || 0.8 || 0.0 || 0.0

LU || 0.0 || 0.0 || 51.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 4.0 || 0.0 || 45.0

LV || 0.0 || 9.0 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 63.3 || 19.8 || 0.0 || 7.2

MD || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

ME || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 93.3 || 6.7

MK || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0

MT || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 99.3 || 0.3 || 0.4 || 0.0

NL || 7.8 || 58.6 || 22.5 || 7.7 || 0.0 || 0.8 || 1.3 || 1.2

NO || 1.3 || 40.5 || 28.8 || 12.3 || 1.0 || 2.9 || 1.5 || 11.8

PL || 24.9 || 13.5 || 5.2 || 24.8 || 2.8 || 7.9 || 3.2 || 17.7

PT || 5.0 || 11.5 || 69.0 || 4.4 || 9.2 || 0.2 || 0.2 || 0.6

RO || 10.6 || 9.2 || 49.9 || 8.7 || 5.4 || 5.4 || 7.1 || 3.6

RS || 0.0 || 4.8 || 39.8 || 20.8 || 18.4 || 1.3 || 4.1 || 10.8

SE || 5.2 || 33.8 || 1.9 || 38.5 || 3.4 || 15.4 || 0.0 || 1.8

SI || 3.1 || 7.8 || 23.2 || 1.9 || 0.0 || 17.7 || 0.0 || 46.4

SK || 23.1 || 0.0 || 9.2 || 0.0 || 13.9 || 7.1 || 15.2 || 31.4

TR || 11.5 || 5.7 || 7.7 || 33.8 || 34.4 || 5.7 || 1.2 || 0.0

UK || 0.0 || 14.8 || 13.7 || 6.9 || 38.5 || 9.4 || 11.6 || 5.3

[1] http://www.esrf.fr/files/live/sites/www/files/about/upgrade/documentation/BROCHURE%20IMPACT%20OF%20ESRF%20AND%20UPGRADE_ENGLISH%20VERSION_LR.pdf

[2] The results included concern only some specific aspects related to ERA (they do not include the results on the Open Labour Market for Researchers, which are presented in the corresponding section) , and no weight has been attributed to the different areas, which unbalanced the results: those countries with more actions for example on gender or knowledge transfer will score higher only due to the consideration of more areas in the analysis.

[3] See annex for a description of the methodology 5.5.

[4]       http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/pdf/esfri-strategy_report_and_roadmap.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none

[5] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/

[6] http://www.upr.si/fileadmin/user_upload/RK_RS/RK_RS_angleska/am509774CEE_EN_E4.pdf

[7] http://erc.europa.eu/

[8] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/strategy4Researcher

[9] http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp6/model-contract/pdf/fp6-public-bodies-annex5231_en.pdf

[10] http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/licensing/licensing.htm

[11] http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp6/model-contract/pdf/fp6-public-bodies-annex5231_en.pdf

[12] Source: http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents_faq.html#patent

[13] Source : http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents_faq.html#patent

[14] http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/annexes/h2020-wp1415-annex-h-esacrit_en.pdf

[15] UNESCO, UIS (2012), International Standard Classification of Education ISCED 2011, available at: http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/isced-2011-en.pdf

[16] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/Principles_for_Innovative_Doctoral_Training.pdf

[17] Source: BusinessDictionnary

[18] Source: EARTO

[19] http://www.bu.edu/datamanagement/background/whatisdata/

[20] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/Principles_for_Innovative_Doctoral_Training.pdf

[21]http://www.oecd.org/sti/oecdsciencetechnologyandindustryscoreboard2011innovationandgrowthinknowledgeeconomies.htm

[22]http://www.oecd.org/innovation/innovationinsciencetechnologyandindustry/oslomanualguidelinesforcollectingandinterpretinginnovationdata3rdedition.htm

[23] http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/OECDFrascatiManual02_en.pdf

1.  MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

In Austria, research and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of the federal level and regional strategies, complement research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) policies and activities on national and EU levels. Coordination between the federal and regional level is done under the RTDI platform Austria (‘Plattform FTI-Österreich’) in the form of a semi-annual conference. The main policy makers in the public research and development (R&D) domains are: the Ministry of Science, Research and Economy (BMWFW) and the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT). The BMWFW has been taking over the tasks of the former Ministry of Science and Research (BMWF) and the former Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth (BMWFJ) (all references adapted to the new title). The Council for Research and Technology Development (Rat für Forschung und Technologieentwicklung) is the federal government’s strategic independent scientific and technological advisory body for questions related to R&D policy. It works with the ministries on recommendations for the medium-to long-term policy orientation.

The main funding agencies are the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) and the Austria Business Service (AWS). The FWF covers basic research and is under the responsibility of and receives its funding from the BMWFW. The FFG (under BMVIT and BMWFW) provides funds dedicated mainly to applied research and thematic oriented R&D programmes. The FFG partners with regions to complement their funding via Structural Funds. AWS as a State-owned banking institution (under BMWFW and BMVIT) funds mainly innovation projects in companies, supports seed financing and start-ups.     

The Austrian Academy of the Sciences (ÖAW) is Austria's largest non-university R&D organisation.

The Austrian Federal Government strategy for research, technology and innovation ‘Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future’ was published in March 2011. It introduces a coordinated vision and strategy across all ministries in charge of RTDI and identifies new challenges. Some thematic priorities can also be extracted: climate change, resources and quality of life and demographic change. The strategy has clear links to the European Research Area (ERA) key priorities and plans support measures under all of them. It also mentions international cooperation among Austria’s priorities.            

In 2011, a Task Force of senior officials was also put in place to coordinate activities from the strategic perspective and monitor the implementation of this strategy. Nine inter-ministerial working groups were established, among those one on European dimension of research agendas, one on research infrastructure, one on knowledge transfer and one on international cooperation. An ‘Austrian EU Action Plan’ has been developed in cooperation by BMWFW and BMVIT. The action plan proposes more than 70 measures to optimise Austria's research, technology and innovation (RTI) system regarding Horizon 2020, ERA, the Innovation Union and the overall Europe-2020 strategy. It is formally up to the government to decide which of the proposal will be implemented.

In recent months, Austria established an ERA Observatory to bundle strategic information, advice and coordination under a common roof. A high-level advisory body on European research and innovation policies, called ‘ERA Council Forum Austria’ under the chair of former ERC President Helga Nowotny, started its work in March 2014. With the aim of improving coordination among ministries and stakeholders, an ‘ERA Policy Forum Austria’ has been created. It should increase awareness and consistency in the way Austria addresses sectoral policies with high impact on RTI, in particular from a European perspective. The Council for Research and Technology Development has the task of monitoring the progress of the strategy’s implementation and reports to the Parliament (National Council) on an annual basis.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Austria represented EUR 294 per inhabitant in 2012 almost twice as much as the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR302. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.6% of total government expenditures and 0.8 % of Gross Domestic Product (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in Austria has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Austria even when it regressed at EU28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based public R&D funding is organised within thematic and open bottom-up approaches, by both the FWF and the FFG. Competitive structural and thematic R&D programmes have become increasingly important in the last years.  

The FWF mainly funds academia. Its total grant portfolio was EUR195.2 million for 2011 and EUR196,4 million for 2012. In 2013, the grant budget was EUR202,6 million. The FFG supports business R&D and cooperative research. More than 60 % of competitive public research funds are performed by Austrian businesses.

In 2011, major steps were taken to simplify the implementation of programme management by Austrian public funding administrations (Ministries, agencies etc.): calls for proposals were integrated into annual schedules; common guidelines for similar types of projects have been issued and an agreement was reached to treat similar projects in the same way (by BMVIT, BMWFW and FFG).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 49 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

For the two main funding agencies, FWF and FFG, overall principles for the application, evaluation and selection procedures are detailed in the FTE-Richtlinien (2007). Specific guidelines for the Austrian Research Promotion Agency are regulated in the legal base FFG-Richtlinien (2008). International peer-review principles are not mentioned as such, but results from the implementation of the guidelines by both agencies. The FWF exclusively uses international peer-review for the applications. Project selection criteria and procedures adhere to principles of excellence, impartiality, transparency, appropriateness for purpose, efficiency and speed, confidentiality, and ethical and integrity considerations. The FFG applies specifically-tailored evaluation criteria, according to the needs of the programme. The FFG-law stipulates that all FFG-funding decisions have to be taken upon the principles of transparency, impartiality, and fairness.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Public funds in Austria are more often distributed via institutional than project-based modes, roughly accounting for two thirds and a third, respectively, of total funding. National public funding for the higher education sector is mostly institutional. It is regulated in the 'Universitätsgesetz 2002' and based on performance agreements at university level and less so for public research institutes. A revision of the universities financing legislation (the University Structural Funds Ordinance) in January 2013 further strengthened the trend towards institutional funding by allocating additional money to it for 2013-2015. Institutional funds destined for universities are a combination of three categories: funds for teaching, for research and for infrastructure. A two-year basis for calculation applies. Funds allocated for research are based on the number of students, a competitively-oriented research indicator (based on, for example the number of PhDs, project volume financed by the FWF, project volume financed by industry or other sources) and a strategic budget depending on the societal objectives of the universities (for example, the share of women in PhD programs, participation in outgoing mobility programs, number of foreign graduate students). Full implementation of the institutional funding model is foreseen for the performance contract period 2019-2021, for period 2016-2018 up to 60 % of university funding will be based upon this model.           

The ÖAW, which underwent structural reforms in 2012, has concluded with BMWFW a multi-annual performance agreement that comprises the period of 2012-2014, with a total budget of EUR224 million for the three-year period.           

Higher Education Institutions (HEI) have to undergo external quality assurance every seven years. In March 2012, under the 'Quality Assurance Framework Law' the Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation Austria was established. This agency is responsible for external quality assurance for all types of universities. Later in 2012, the Platform Research & Technology Policy Evaluation (FTEVAL) published its new standards for evaluations in the field of research, technology and innovation, with impact on future institutional assessments and general evaluation practice in Austria in medium- and long-term.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 15.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Austria’s trans-national and international priorities are included in the overall Federal Government strategy for research, technology and innovation 'Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future'.  

Austria is also interested in improving the general standards for cross-border research coordination.         

The new workprogramme of the Austrian Federal Government for 2013-2018 states under the research chapter the will to strengthen trans-national and international cooperation by establishing of RTI-Attachés and additional Offices of Science and Technology Austria (OSTA) in priority countries in and outside Europe.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Austria allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Austria dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the seventh Framework Programme, Austria's total share of participation is 3 % and the country received 3 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR130 per inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2,9 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in eight of the ten on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change (FACCE), Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water Challenges for a Changing World and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In the National Reform Programme 2014, Austria states that it plans to 'devote particular effort to the alignment of European and national strategies within the framework of those initiatives.'

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country also participated in a total of 87 ERA-NETs, of which 22 are currently still running. The country also has participated in 11 ERA-NET Plus actions - of which seven are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Austria has at least 12 bilateral agreements with Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, FYR of Macedonia. Bilateral agreements, whether with MS/AC or third countries          do not only include the federal government level, but also cooperation at university or public research organisations (for example ÖAW) levels. Programmes serve to fund bilateral collaborations in cases where the two national subprojects are so closely connected that they may only be performed in conjunction with one another.        

Austria participates in the D-A-CH multilateral agreement between Germany, Austria and Switzerland.  

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises 11 priority areas (PA), PA 7 pertaining to the knowledge society and PA 2 dealing with sustainable energy issues.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Concerning international cooperation with third countries and regions, Austria has recently developed the overall Federal Government strategy for research, technology and innovation titled 'Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future' including the sub-strategy on international cooperation dubbed 'Beyond Europe'. Based on these strategy papers, Austria will inter alia expand its cooperation with innovation front-runners such as the United States, selected Asian nations and the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China and South Africa), as well as continuing its collaboration with Central, Eastern and South-Eastern European countries.

Austria has concluded several intergovernmental bilateral science and technology (S&T) agreements as well as Memoranda of Understanding on S&T cooperation including Argentina, China, India, the Republic of Korea,Vietnam, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.             

Additionally, the Commission for Development Research (KEF) at the Austrian Agency for International Cooperation in Education and Research (OeAD) supports numerous research partnerships between Austrian researchers and researchers from developing countries as well as participating in the EU-funded ERAfrica Project. Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Austria allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Austria, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported within the D-A-CH multilateral agreement between Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). These agencies have agreed to apply the so called 'Lead agency' procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries (for research projects with participants of at least two of the three countries). It also allows researchers to move to one of those countries following a money-follows-cooperation-line scheme, a scheme which allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. Negotiations are on-going to include similar funding agencies from the Netherlands or the UK. Funding agencies do not implement the money-follows researchers scheme.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 48.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 4.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Austria allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Austria participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RI): European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) and the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortia, Austria is involved in four of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of RI of European interest involving several European countries. Austria is hosting BBMRI-ERIC and is member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC and ESS ERIC.

In terms of support for developing and implementating RIs, one important policy priority outlined in the national RTDI strategy is the improvement of national RI as well as Austria’s integration and commitments to international infrastructures (e.g. ESFRI). Thus, this is the focus of one of the inter-ministerial working groups of the Task Force established for its implementation. A tentative national roadmap on research infrastructures, partly depending on future budget availability, is part of the recent Task Force report. In February 2014, the Austrian government released a document called 'Austrian Research Infrastructure – Action Plan 2014-2020'. It outlines the ESFRI infrastructures that are of central importance to the Austrian research environment and the major benefits of participating in these projects for the Austrian research sector which are strengthening competitiveness by ensuring complementarity of national infrastructures, access to equipment, knowledge and technology transfer and the structural improvement (defragmentation) of the humanities and social sciences research landscape.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to RIs, at the end of 2011, the Austrian Council for research, technology and development (RTD) has published specific recommendations regarding the further improvement of national infrastructures, which includes among other measures the establishment of a national repository for Austria Ris. A national repository of RI was established and measures were taken to allow its continuous improvement.        

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by Austria, access to five of them has been funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Austria in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Austria_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 37,114 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Austria in 2011. This represents 8.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 76.0 in Austria compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 55 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Following an amendment to the Universities Act, Austrian Universities must advertise research job vacancies (for scientific and research staff) internationally, at least EU-wide. University institutions decide autonomously on the instrument for advertising vacancies internationally. The Ministry of Science, Research and Economy actively promotes the EURAXESS Jobs portal via brochures, flyers, and newspaper advertisements in order to raise awareness of the European job database among universities and public research organisations. The Job Exchange is a service provided by the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology and the Austrian Research Promotion Agency, and is available online. As part of the Talents programme, it offers a range of jobs in research and development and innovation in Austria – from internships and PhD positions to senior posts (some 5 500 job offers in 2013). Information is available at: http://www.ffg.at/jobboerse.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The promotion of the ‘Charter & Code’ and broad implementation of their principles at Austrian universities was part of the 2010-12 and 2013-2015 performance agreements with universities. In Austria, 18 universities have signed the ‘Charter & Code’, as have three funding organisations, three umbrella organisations, four research organisations, three universities of applied sciences, one private university, one representative of industry and the former Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research. The implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ is part of the National Action Plan for Researchers. The Medical University of Graz was the first Austrian university to receive Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) acknowledgement from the European Commission. It has been followed by the FWF, the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU) and the University of Salzburg.

By May 2014, five Austrian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which four had received the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The Austrian database for scholarships and research grants (www.grants.at), Austria’s most comprehensive database for scholarships and research grants (in English and German), offers an overview of approximately 1 200 funding opportunities for incoming and outgoing researchers, graduates and students. The Austrian Science Fund runs seminars to explain its funding procedures and thus for researchers to present their own ideas to the reviewers of the FWF programmes. The Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) provides proposal-writing seminars to enhance post-doc student writing skills. The Austrian Agency for International Cooperation in Education and Research (OeAD) provides guidelines, recommendations, and seminars for drafting grant proposals.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.2 in 2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In order to increase the number of doctoral graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), a number of Austrian universities are establishing new organisational structures for doctoral training (and in particular supervision), e.g. doctoral schools or doctoral centres. In addition, some universities are developing new structural doctoral programmes aimed at supplementing and broadening doctoral training. Following an amendment to the Universities Act, doctoral training was extended to three years as of the 2009-10 winter term in order to improve the quality of doctoral training. In addition, universities have established new doctoral curricula and have introduced additional measures to improve quality, skills and supervision of doctoral training. The Doctoral Programme, a joint initiative led by internationally-recognised scientists, facilitates work experience abroad for researchers and offers training in support of transferable skill development. In addition to measures aimed at improving researchers’ research proposal writing skills, the Austrian Economic Service (Austria Wirtschaftsservice - awsg) offers services to increase researchers’ awareness of intellectual property rights.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU27 Member State was 18.5 % in Austria compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 8.6 % in Austria compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The APART Programme awards fellowships to national and international students in support of a post-doctoral thesis, or the continuation of a scientific project. Third-country applicants must carry out their research project at an Austrian research institution. The percentage of foreign researchers among APART fellows in 2010-2012 was 18 %. In the DOC Programme PhD studies can be conducted at universities or research institutions both in Austria and abroad. In 2011 and 2012, 15 % of the fellows conducted research at universities or research institutions abroad. Similarly, the DOC-team Programme supports teams working on trans-disciplinary research projects in humanities, cultural studies and social sciences. Each team member must spend at least half a year at a research institution abroad. As the largest post-doctoral programme for outbound mobility for basic research in Austria, the Schroedinger Programme aims to enable young scientists normally based in Austria to work abroad at leading research institutions and on leading research programmes in order to gain research experience abroad during their post-doctorat. With the possibility of also applying for a reintegration phase, the programme aims to facilitate the return phase for the researchers in order to reverse the brain drain from Austria.

The BRIDGE Programme focuses specifically on the funding of industrial research-cooperation projects. Funded projects are those expected to build on the basic research of scientific institutes and take them closer to potential commercialisation through collaborative research with businesses. The projects carried out as part of concrete research collaborations are intended to enable an effective exchange of research results and expertise. Another aim is to foster communication between science and industry, opening up new prospects for both partners. The funding of collaborative projects is designed to facilitate mutual access to each other’s expertise and help companies overcome their apprehension about (basic) research. The COMET Competence Centre Programme aims to develop international research excellence and expertise, and support the technological leadership of companies to strengthen Austria as a top destination for research. The research carried out in competence centres ranges from medium to long term and meets high standards of quality. The programme’s priorities are the applied orientation of top-level research and its actual implementation in the industry sector. COMET is sponsored by the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) and the Ministry of Science, Research and Economy (BMWFW). It follows on the success of their previous competence centre programmes. The provinces also support COMET with additional funding. The Austrian Research Promotion Agency is responsible for managing COMET. There are currently (Status 31 December 2013) 21 COMET K-Centres (five K2 Centres and 16 K1 Centres) as well as 24 K-Projects running with federal funding of approximately EUR50 million per year.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Austria has set up specific laws and actions to implement gender equality in research.

Tackling discrimination is high on the government agenda. The new Austrian Federal Government workprogramme for 2013-2018, under chapter 03 'Education, science, art and culture, women' considers women careers in research (Science sub-chapter) but also gender pay gap and other general measures (Women sub-chapter). Austria plans to advocate 'an active equality policy at European level with regard to economic gender equality and reconciling of work and family life'.             

In the course of the new reform of budget laws, gender budgeting and gender equality were laid down in the Federal Constitutional Act (BV-G) and Federal Budget Act (BHG). The latter provides for a balanced representation in academic leadership positions and boards. On the basis of these laws a gender equality objective was developed by all ministries.             

Several acts are in place to ensure gender equality: the Charter on the Compatibility of Family and Career, the National Action Plan (NAP) for Gender Equality in the Labour Market, the Care Allowance Reform Act 2012 and the Care Allowance Act.    

Since 2009, objectives to attain gender balance in leadership positions and decision-making bodies in public research organisations and higher education institutions were gradually put in place by the University Act. Concerning gender balance in decision making, the country has set up a female quota for the participation of under-represented sex in decision-making bodies of Research Performing Organisations. The 2009 amendment of the Universities Act stipulates a women quota of 40 % in university committees and boards. Gender specific measures are included in the performance agreements with universities (for example the 40 % mandatory representation of women). Austrian Universities provide statements and figures on gender (and budget) and how  they progress on gender equality. BMWFW evaluates progress on an annual basis using performance indicators, including gender indicators.

The Universities Act also contains references to establishing an organisational unit responsible for  coordinating activities relating to gender equality and the so-called 'Affirmative Action Plans'. Performance agreements with universities include financial incentives for gender-specific issues and among other things universities commit themselves to support work-life balance by offering childcare facilities, parental leave and flexible working hours.            

Additionally, the 2014 National Reform Programme underlines that 'Strategic gender equality targets have also been defined in the universities’ performance agreements', and that it will continue to support campaigns for attracting women in scientific careers.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 95.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

General laws require equal treatment for women and several provisions are included to ensure that: maternity leave is not a discriminating factor; pregnancy automatically freezes temporary contracts; women have the right to return to an equal position to the one held before their maternity leave and to have a part-time position when they end their maternity leave.             

The country has measures that support returning to work after parental leave. FWF and ÖAW fellowship programmes allow for interruptions and extensions in case of maternity leave.

Austria has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in research programmes and/or projects. All FWF programmes provide for a quota of 30 % women scientists/scholars and this target has been achieved.

The country provides incentives for recruiting female researchers and promoting access of female researchers to senior positions in research-performing organisations. The Universities Act provides for the implementation of gender monitoring with respect to recruitment and targeted recruitment in public research organisations and universities.      

It has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically support female researchers. Since 2002, several support schemes have been put in place to support recruitment, retention and career progression of female researchers: under the umbrella of the inter-ministerial action programme 'Women in Research and Technology', fForte: the Excellentia Programme launched in 2005 to support women full professors; the fForte Coaching Programme supports women in writing successful grant proposals; the ‘Laura Bassi Centres of Excellence’ encourage women to apply for top positions; the FEMtech programme seeks to increase female participation in industry innovation and applied sciences at PROs. The FWF career programmes support women at the start of their careers and to apply for full professors.

The Working Group on Gender and Diversity Management within the BMWFW aims to implement diversity measures as cultural and institutional change initiatives. In this regard, a study that focuses on how to achieve cultural and structural change within the scientific and research community has been commissioned by the BMWFW.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 69.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The Country has set up provisions to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes and/or projects. FFG and FWF have included gender in research content considerations in grant application and reporting guidelines of specific funding instruments. In 2012 the Gender Studies Association Austria was established to develop gender studies at universities as well as higher education institutions. 

Certain FEMtech R&D grants target gender-specific innovation since 2010, e.g. accounts for gender differences and its implications for product design.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 93.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 63.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Austria is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Austria supports open access in the frame of the performance agreements with universities. Activities concerning open access policies are up to individual research-performing organisations (RPOs) and research funding institutions. In January 2010 the Austrian Rector's Conference (UNIKO) published its recommendations to enhance open access policies in Austria. In 2012, under the organisational umbrella of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and UNIKO, research funders and performers have organised themselves into the 'Open Access Network Austria' to coordinate open access activities and make nationwide recommendations in the field. Additionally, since 2007 research and funding institutions from Austria, Switzerland and Germany cooperate in a joint project/online platform to improve information, knowledge and discuss open access.

Open access was enshrined as a topic of the future at national level as the Austrian Council for Research and Technology Development (RFTE) articulated open access in their Strategy 2020, that all public research results in Austria shall be freely accessible on the Internet by 2020.

Open access is one the key priorities of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the main funding for basic research in Austria.

FWF has a mandatory policy on open access, including towoards data where legally possible, with green and gold open access as equivalent options. Similarly, the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW) and the University of Graz have developed an institutional open access policy. All other universities will follow.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data this is legally included, where possible into open access for publications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 18.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations making publicly funded scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge, is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW), the University of Vienna, the Austrian Library Network LTD have created a repository.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private sectors, Austria has embedded academia-industry cooperation among the objectives of the 2011 Austrian Federal Government strategy for research, technology and innovation 'Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future'. However, the country has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. The adoption of the strategy was followed by an inter-ministerial working group 'knowledge transfer and start-ups' and introduced improved tax measures in 2012.

The Austrian RTI strategy aims to improve and stimulate the level of collaboration between universities, public research organisations and the economic sector. For this purpose the Austrian RTI strategy promotes the establishment of knowledge transfer centers. Knowledge transfer between universities, other research organisations and the private sector will be promoted within three virtual regional Knowledge Transfer Centres and within a virtual thematic Knowledge Transfer Centre in the field of life sciences. The new BMWFW funding programme should offer incentives for Austrian state universities and defined research institutes to use strategic partnerships within the framework of the regional and thematic knowledge transfer centres to jointly utilise the potential that has been built up in recent years in the field of knowledge and technology transfer and thus to further increase both quality and professionalism. Optimised transfer processes should furthermore enable universities in particular to participate to an even greater extent in the innovation process.        

The new Austrian Federal Government workprogramme for 2013-2018 states under the research chapter the willingness to safeguard knowledge transfer, increase cooperation between science and business and develop and implement a national strategy for intellectual property.        

In the ongoing performance agreements with universities and the ÖAW assurance is given that reliable and sustainable intellectual property and utilisation strategies will be developed to enable partners from the economy to formulate long-term research targets.

There are specific programmes for transferring knowledge, creating and supporting spin-offs and supporting intellectual property rights (IPRs) at the level of universities and research organisations, and specific placement schemes for young researchers in industry. The general programme of the FFG has remained Austria’s most important source of public funding for R&D carried out by industry in terms of funding budget, efforts to promote R&D in all economic sectors and industries, areas of technology, and sizes of companies. Some examples of FFG programmes fostering academia-industry cooperation are COMET, COIN, BRIDGE, AplusB or uni:invent. The Christian Doppler Research Association provides also for academia-business cooperation within its programmes. Knowledge transfer measures are considered effective as they have led to a high level of transfer activities and Austria ranks third among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in this respect.

In 2010, a national contact point (NCP) was designated at the BMWFW. The NCP's tasks include coordinating measures regarding knowledge transfer between public research organisations and the private sector, including tackling trans-national issues, in liaison with similar contact points in other Member States. The project Intellectual Property Agreement Guide (IPAG) is funded by the NCP. The aim of IPAG is to support universities, public research institutions and also enterprises in the professional handling of intellectual properties (IP) by drafting model agreements. A set of model contracts is made available helping the most appropriate model contracts to be selected. The use of theses model contracts is voluntary (www.ipag.at). The project is an important contribution to enhance trust and confidence between all relevant stakeholders and should simplify the legal and administrative processes. As part of efforts to generate greater public awareness of the link between science and industry, the Phönix Award of the BMWFW  is given to young university spin-offs from universities and public research organisations. It aims to enhance the visibility of the excellent scientific outcomes of Austrian universities.

Strategic partnerships between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Austria, for example the FFG funds the Laura Bassi Centres of Expertise and the thematic programme “Leuchttürme eMobilität” (Lighthouses of E-mobility).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 82.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 85.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Austria who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is similar to the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in FTE) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

With regards to access and usage of e-infrastructures and digital research services, most Austrian academic institutions (more than 80 %) are part of the Austrian Academic Computer Network (ACOnet -'Österreichisches akademisches Computernetz') which is the National Research and Education Network (NREN) run by the University of Vienna. This is essential to make digital services possible. However, Austria does not have a strategy for implementating the Digital European Research Area (ERA).

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Austria was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations, through ACOnet, which offers its members high-performance access and support services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 28.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Austria, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 94 research performing organisations in Austria answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 40.1% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011). One important research performing organisation is not included.

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Austria shows that 21.1 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 51.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 27.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 85.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 10.6 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 3.7 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

For the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by some of the ministries without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence the percentage is relatively high compared to official figures. Moreover one of the big funding organisations in Austria could not make a distinction between project based or institutional funding.

For the indicators on Open Access the non-response rate was high, while a high percentage ofof organisations that did reply perform applied research. These factors explain the relatively low scores on Open Access.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Austrian EU Action Plan || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Reform of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW) || 2012 || X ||

Quality Assurance Framework Law establishing the Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation Austria || 2012 || X ||

The Austrian Research, Technological Development and Innovation Strategy “Becoming an Innovation Leader: Realising Potentials, Increasing Dynamics, Creating the Future" || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Updated evaluation standard published by the semi-public Platform Research & Technology Policy Evaluation (FTEVAL) || 2012 || X ||

Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) Revised university financing provisions || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Support for European initiatives e.g. the European Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan (national representatives level)  and for the participation of national researchers || 2013 || X || X

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Establishment of FTI-Attachés and additional Offices of Science and Technology Austria (OSTA) || 2014 || X || X

Beyond Europe Die Internationalisierung Österreichs in Forschung, Technologie und Innovation über Europa hinaus || 2013 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Joint Programming Initiatives - Austria is leading the JPI Urban Europe and is participating in 7 more JPIs || 2013 || X || X

Article 185, ERA-nets and ERA-nets plus || 2013 || X || X

New scientific clusters launched and evaluation exercise passed in the Danube strategy || 2014 || X || X

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Establishment of a repository of research infrastructures in Austria || 2011 || ||

Draft national roadmap for for the building of new infrastructures and link to ESFRI. || 2011 || ||

Participation in ESFRI Initiatives || 2013 || X || X

 Austrian Research Infrastructure – Action Plan 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

National  EURAXESS portal || || ||

Attractive careers

Implementation of the provision of the Scientific Visa Directive 2005/71/EC and recommendations 2005/762/EC and 2005/761/EC || || ||

Recognition ("Nostrifizierung") of foreign diploma or training qualifications || 2011 || ||

The brainpower austria programme; the Career Grants Programme; various grants and scholarships || || ||

Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) (revision of/amendment to the original 2002 law, Bundesgesetz BGBl. I Nr. 81/2009) || 2009 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

FWF structured doctoral programmes Hertha Finberg Programme and Elise Richter Programme || || ||

Revision of the Federal law on the organisation of universities and their studies (Austrian Universities Act) (revision of/amendment to the original 2002 law) || 2011 || ||

Federal Constitutional Act (BV-G) and Federal Budget Act (BHG) Federal Equal Treatment Act and equivalents at regional level || 2013 || X || X

The Charter on the Compatibility of Family and Career, The National Action Plan (NAP) for Gender Equality in the Labour Market, The Care Allowance Reform Act 2012 and The Care Allowance Act National policy on gender equality || 2013 || X || X

Working Group on Gender and Diversity Management || 2013 || X || X

inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), industry and PROs branch (FEMtech) || 2002 || ||

Inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), industry and PROs branch (FEMtech) || 2002 || ||

inter-ministerial action umbrella programme fForte (Women in Research and Technology), schooling branch Educational gender initiatives by BMWF || || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open Access Network Austria || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Overarching laws on the research system Inter-ministerial working group “knowledge transfer and start-ups” || || ||

Tax incentives for research || 2012 || X ||

Christian Doppler Research Association || || ||

General Programme of the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) - support of KT and OI || 2011 || ||

Establishment of a national contact point (NCP) for IP management || 2010 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

ACOnet “Österreichisches akademisches Computernetz” - member of GÉANT || || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN || 213 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The research and innovation (R&I) policy is designed and implemented in a multi-level governance framework involving the Federal Government and autonomous regional/community governments.

The Federal Government has competence for the federal scientific institutes, intellectual property (IP) law, standardisation, fundamental metrology, nuclear research, corporate taxation, employment legislation and social security. The communities are competent for matters related to individuals including scientific research and (higher) education, and the Community Scientific Institutes. The regions are competent for territorial matters such as energy, environment, and economic support, thus including innovation, applied and industrial research, science parks, and technology transfer. The three Belgian regions (Brussels-Capital, Flanders and Wallonia) design policies that suit the specific needs of their business sectors for innovation and that are tailored to optimise the potential of their higher education research capacities. The Belgian German-speaking community does not have a research policy.

At Federal level, the Federal Office for Science Policy (BELSPO) provides project funding. Moreover, the Federal level supports the federal research institutes. In Flanders, the Flemish Government defines policy orientations and provides institutional funding to higher education institutions (HEIs). Its main funding instrument is the Special Research Fund (BOF) allocated depending on defined criteria (BOF-key). Project-based funding is managed by two agencies: the Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO) and the Institute for the Promotion of Innovation by Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT). FWO stimulates fundamental research, whereas IWT promotes innovation through science and technologies. The Hercules Foundation stimulates the use of a large research infrastructure,  which  proposals can be forwarded to.  In Wallonia, industrial research funding and funding for academic, public or not-for-profit research centres are managed by the General Operational Directorate for Economy, Employment and Research, called DGO6. In the French Community, the National Scientific Research Fund (F.R.S-FNRS) manages competitive project funding. Research and development (R&D) investments are long-term secured and multi-annual research and development and innovation (R&D&I) strategies are implemented at  different government levels.

The country has adopted an R&I strategy on a regional level.

In Flanders, the regional R&D and innovation strategy is based on the minister’s policy note on innovation that covers the priorities and initiatives for the five year governing period, which is elaborated by annual policy letters. In adittion, there are related initiatives such as e.g. the Concept note on Innovation Centre Flanders (2011). At the overall policy level of Flanders, the Flanders in Action (FiA) future plan aims to make Flanders one of the top five EU regions by 2020, and includes targets on research. The amended Flemish Parliament Act on Innovation from 2012 sets out the legal basis for subsidies for special research funds, and legal anchoring of the young researchers support programme. Belgium has a Country Specific Recommendation: 'Restore competitiveness […] by promoting innovation through streamlined incentive schemes and reduced administrative barriers'.

In Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, the Research Strategy 2011-2015 follows up on their willingness for closer cooperation between the different policy levels (cfr. Marshall Plan2.Green). This document sets out eight strategic objectives (including reiterating the 3 % objective), identifies five priority thematic areas and includes a detailed plan of action for meeting the objectives. Competitive funding is implemented through calls for proposals connected to the research strategy priorities (i.e.GREENTIC, Competitiveness Poles, RELIABLE programme, etc). The Wallonia Marshall Plan2.Green allocates funds to competitiveness clusters with support to public-private partnerships and projects related to the research strategy priorities (information and communication technologies, sustainable development, ageing and health).

Additional competitive funds are available from the Strategic Fundamental Research fund, hosting the virtual research institutes for life sciences and sustainable development.

In terms of R&D&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Belgium represented EUR 224 per inhabitant in 2012, above the EU28 level (EUR179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.2 % of total government expenditures  and 0,7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

However, GBOARD does not show the complete picture for Belgium. Apart from direct support to R&D indirect support by fiscal measures (tax benefits) plays a substantial role in Belgium. The sum of direct and indirect support has increased over the period 2007-2012 and is close to 1.1 % of GDP in 2012. Fiscal measures for R&D and innovation in Belgium amount to around EUR 1,1 billion in 2012.

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Belgium has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in  Belgium, measured as percentage of public government expenditure evolved more negatively than the negative evolution observed in the EU27. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed in Belgium but less than the evolution observed in EU28.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

•           In October 2012, the Council of Ministers (federal government) approved the launch of the first phase (2012-2017) of the recurrent Research Framework Programme BRAIN-be. The programme, which mobilises EUR18 million/year, is organised around six themes, open to the participation of researchers and institutions from other countries on a co-funding basis and supports two types of research projects: network projects and pioneer projects.

•           The Research Strategy 2011-2015 remains the main policy document: it allows for public private partnership (PPP) funding and the support of several calls for projects connected to its priority themes (GREENTIC, competiveness poles, RELIABLE programme, Employment-Environment Alliance etc.)

•           In the Wallonia's Marshall Plan 2.Green, funding is allocated to competitiveness clusters, with additional support for PPPs and to R&D programmes on subjects linked to the Research Strategy for, in particular, ICT, the environment and sustainable development, ageing and health.

•           Through the Fundamental Strategic Research Fund, additional funds were made available for fundamental strategic research, hosting the virtual research institutes for life sciences (continuation, EUR6 million per year) which already funds research through competitive calls and sustainable development (creation, EUR5 million per year). The fund will also accommodate the Walloon Institute for Sustainable Development.

•           The Walloon Government asked for 22 approved research centres to be brought together into seven institutes, in order to simplify the landscape of these research centres and to guarantee cohesion among the subjects handled within them. A body called WAL-TECH, tasked with ensuring the visibility of the institutes and management of internal collaboration will oversee these institutes. The objective is to increase the service provided to businesses, in particular small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs), wishing to improve their process or to develop new products.

•           In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, block funding for HEIs is allocated on the basis of the number of students and full time equivalent (FTE) researchers. The allocation of block funding is not based on scientific performance indicators such as bibliometrics.

•           In the Flemish Community, additional funding for universities is also distributed based on an allocation key, which is partially based on scientific output indicators.

•           The Innovatiedecreet (Flemish Parliament Act on Innovation) was modified, whereby three elements were added: conditions for the support of the higher education sector (good governance, strategic planning, gender balance, reporting and science communication), the legal basis for subsidies for the special research funds, the legal anchoring of the programme for the support of young researchers.

•           In 2011, a new support programme for young researchers was implemented in the Flemish Community. Since the budgetary year of 2013, this annual subsidy of EUR4 million has been embedded legally.

•           Starting from 1 January 2012 a new agreement between the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) and the Flemisch Governement was put in place.  Based on this agreement FWO can support for the next five years basic research performed at Flemish universities and institutes.

•           In the Flemish Community, the period of the legal basis for funding from the BOF ended in 2012. A new decision has been approved that builds on the existing legislation, and also alters some specifications. The funding from BOF aimed at universities includes a number of conditions that refer to the autonomy of the universities. Also, a number of parameters were changed for the distribution of the budget among universities. There will be guaranteed minima for small and middle-sized universities. Finally, a number of gender mesures are included to stimulate the balance between the sexes in academic research and  actively involve more women .

•           After concluding new long-term agreements with the Flemish strategic research centres VIB (biotechnology), IMEC (nanotechnology), iMinds (ICT) for the period 2012-2016, the Flemish Community also cconcluded with VITO, after an evaluation by international experts, a new multi-annual covenant. During the period 2014-2018, VITO will annually receive a grant of a minimum of EUR39 million. VITO should become/remain an internationally renowned research organisation in the areas of environment, energy and materials, and stimulate an attractive innovation climate for companies from Flanders.

•           The concept note 'Innovatiecentrum Vlaanderen' from 2011 elaborated a basis for a more flexible approach of thematic-oriented innovative centres at the initiative of the industry, the so-called 'Lichte Structuren' (innovation platforms). A number of existing excellence centres as well as new centres (e.g. FISCH for sustainable chemisrty) are being supported under the new legislative framework. Other new initiates are the test gardens or living labs supported by IWT, e.g. on care innovation space Flanders, or on social innovation factory. 

•           For 2013, within the implementation of Creative Wallonia, actions will be continued and strengthened and new actions will be launched:

- Launch of a tool for diagnosis of innovation potential for SMEs.

- Creation of Creative Labs in two Teacher Training HEIs to test the possibility of extending the tool and see if eventually all pupils of basic teaching could benefit from new approaches in this subject.

- Creation of one or more Living Lab/Fablab: a feasibility study is underway.

- Fulfilment in the first semester of an assessment of the Creative Wallonia Plan.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 45.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are arranged at regional level. In Flanders, the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) calls on international experts to evaluate all applications, both fellowships and projects. These procedures are based on the European Science Foundation's (ESF) European Peer Review Guide. Applicants provide a list of ten possible referees out of which the FWO randomly contacts referees until at least two international peer review reports are available. Specific regulations on External Peer Reviews are in place to make sure that there is no conflict of interest between the applicant and the referee. Efforts for avoiding, detecting and punishing conflicts of interest have been further intensified since 2012, which resulted in a significant lower amount of conflicts.

Projects submitted under calls for proposals organised by the Walloon Region are also evaluated separately by at least two foreign experts.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment is regularly applied in Flanders and seldom at the Federal level and Wallonia.

In the Flemish Community, additional funding for universities is also distributed based on an allocation key, which is partially based on scientific output indicators such as the numbers of completed PhDs, Mas and the volume of third- party findings. Furthermore there are performance contracts between ministries and universities, formula-based funding etc.

The Flemish Special Research Fund (BOF) of  the Research Foundation Flanders is solely meant for fundamental research in universities in the shape of either projects or mandates and does not have any thematic focus.

In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, block funding for HEIs is allocated on the basis of the number of students and FTE researchers – the allocation of block funding is not allocated based on scientific performance indicators such as bibliometrics. Nonetheless some additional public funding tools for the HEIs, such as the Actions de recherche concertées (ARC) and the Fonds spéciaux de la recherche (FSR) are based on competitive peer reviewing procedures and take the excellence of the research production into account.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 46.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and the support institutional assessment for  allocating  institutional funding is higher than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Belgium allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Belgium dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme, the share of participation of Belgium in total participation is 5% and the country received 4.8% of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 157 per inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 5 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in 10 of the 10 on-going initiatives [coordinating 0 of them]. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

Belgium is involved in four Article169/185 initiatives (Ambient Assisted Living, European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, EMRP and Eurostars),

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 86 ERA-NETs, of which 26 are currently still running. The country also has participated in seven ERA-NET Plus actions of which four are still running in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Flanders is active in several EU Interreg projects in future-oriented domains. Examples are BioBase Europe (bioeconomy), NanoSensEU (nanotechnology) or Waterstofregio (Hydrogen Region, a finalist of the EUROSTARS AWARD 2012.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. 

Several bilateral agreements reinforce cooperation. These agreements are signed at Federal level or Community level. At Federal level, agreements exist with Bulgaria, China, Poland, Russia, Vietnam. Wallonia-Brussels signed agreements with Argentina and the Flemish Community via FWO with Brazil, Ecuador, Quebec, Vietnam, South Africa, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Slovenia. The FWO started in 2012 with a new Pegasus program for postdoctoral fellowships to attract researchers from abroad. Exchange Agreements with the FWO and international partners have entered into force with research councils from South Korea, Turkey and Mexico. In August 2013, Belgium was involved in 125 joint calls related to EU joint research agendas. Moreover, bilateral agreements are also implemented through yearly joint calls.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Belgium allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the organisations declared that they did not receive funding from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is not supported as such. However, Belgium and its Communities develop cooperation with other EU and non-EU countries to facilitate cross border interoperability. The implementation guides of these agreements apply to each bilateral call for proposal and set the common priorities. The crossborder interoperability and mutual recognition mechanism is facilitated in the case of the Lead Agency process implemented in Flanders with Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Slovenia. The key features of the Lead Agency system in are:

•           The support to joint projects for a maximum duration of three years.

•           Thematic areas are defined by the agreements.

•           The objective of these agreements is to enhance the cooperation between the scientists of signatory countries.

•           The proposal is evaluated by the Lead Agency only, according to national rules. The partner funding organisation accepts the evaluation results as a basis for its decision process.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 46.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Belgium allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is lower than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Belgium participates in the following large international research infrastructures: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), The European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) and Institute Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.7% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Belgium is involved in four of the seven consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries. Belgium is member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, ESS ERIC and Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-ERIC).

In terms of support for  developing and implementing Research Infrastructures (RI) in Belgium, there is an ongoing national debate on the approach for  participating in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) roadmap with a clear division of responsibilities and guiding rules. The ministers in charge of research are debating a national approach regarding the participation in the ESFRI roadmap with a clear division of responsibilities and guiding rules. Flanders is co-operating in five ESFRI projects (ICOS, LIFEWATCH, ESSurvey, SHARE, PRACE) over 20 to 25 years, for a budget of EUR 3.5 million in 2012. It has allocated a supplementary budget of EUR 5 million euro to the Hercules Foundation for special research infrastructure, aimed at supporting the participation of Flemish actors in the ESFRI-ERIC initiatives. Proposals from consortia of Flemish researchers were evaluated in 2012 within the context of a general assessment of a potential participation of Flanders at the construction and exploitation of the INSTRUCT, EMBRC, ANAEE en DARIAH projects. For four ESFRI projects (BBMRI, EATRIS, ECRIN, ELIXIR), the evaluation of the proposal and consequent possible Flemish participation will be finalised in 2014. The Flemish Government also awared support to the Grand Accelerateur National d'Ions Lourds (GANIL) in Caen (France), as a one-off input for the setup of the 'High Resolution Separator' of SPIRAL2.

The Wallonia-Brussels Federation and Wallonia approved their participation to the same projects in addition to PRACE (EUR 4.4 million are given by Wallonia for the participation in the PRACE project in 2011) and BBMRI, for a budget of EUR 6 million in 2012.

Some EUR 5.8 million have been jointly allocated by Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation to insert teams of researchers in the European infrastructures of the ESFRI Roadmap (PRACE, SHARE, LIFE WATCH, ICOS, BBMRI and ESSurvey.5).

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to RIs among the research infrastructures coordinated by BE, access to five of them has been funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Belgium in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Belgium_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 42 686 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Belgium in 2011. This represents 8.8 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per 1000 researchers in the public sector was 44.1 in Belgium compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 65% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Recruitment policies are a matter for academic autonomy, but the Federal State encourages institutions to recruit as openly as possible. However, the traditions of some institutions and linguistic laws can be seen as barriers to the openness of the recruitment process. The Wallonia-Brussels Federation’s Fonds de la Recherche scientifique (FRS-FNRS) has reformed its recruitment system throughout the selection process. In detail, the reform eliminates the age criterion formerly applied to applicants for FRS-FNRS mandates, provides pre-defined evaluation criteria and feedback to the candidates, develops an evaluation procedure for selecting of projects that involves more external experts from outside the  Wallonia-Brussels Federation, advertises the calls for candidates and the mechanisms for obtaining a mandate in FRS-FNRS/Associated Funds more widely on different internet portals (FRS-FNRS, EURAXESS, etc). A renewed Internet portal has also been created, containing information of better quality on the FRS-FNRS procedures.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

At Federal level, the BELSPO endorsed the Charter & Code in 2011. All strategic research centres and universities in Flanders have acknowledged and implemented the Charter & Code principles. In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, the EURAXESS Rights Group (made up of university representatives), the FRS-FNRS and the Walloon administration have agreed on a communication plan for the implementation of the Charter & Code. In addition, higher education institutions (via the CGHE - Conseil général des Hautes Ecoles and the Interface ADISIF-Entreprises, a service centre for research centres and higher education institutions and research centres have been invited to participate in the initiative.

By May 2014, 15 Belgian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 11 had received the HR Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The 2012 funding agreements between the Flemish government (Ministry of Innovation) and three strategic Research Centres (IMEC, VIB and iMINDS V.Z.W.), foresees that the research centres must have a coherent Human Resources policy (on recruitment, career development, salary, training and working conditions), should introduce a clear non-discrimination policy and respect the principles of the Charter & Code for recruitment. The agreements contain details of the funding envisaged as well as the duties and rights of the beneficiaries.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per 1000 population aged 25 to 34 years old was 1.5 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Flemish Community finances the Support Programme for Young Researchers with a yearly budget of EUR 4 million. The Programme targets young researchers at doctoral and postdoctoral level, providing them with training, career development incentives, and support for participating in international events and job fairs. In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, measures to improve researchers’ employment skills and competencies are taken individually by the universities and doctoral schools.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU27 Member State was 14.2% in Belgium compared to 18.4% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 21.0 % in Belgium compared to 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The Back to Belgium grants and the post-doc fellowships of the federal government as well as the Methusalem and Odysseus Programmes of the Flemish community and the Ulysses Programme of Wallonia-Brussels Federation target talented researchers to come/remain in Belgium and perform their research activities. They are designed to promote the reintegration (and long-term stay) and use of the skills acquired during a post-doctorat stays abroad of highly-qualified researchers (Belgians, or foreigners who have stayed at least three years in Belgium for studies), who have been working in another country for at least two years.

In the Flemish Community, the Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT) Innovation mandates are set up with the objective of connecting the academic and the industrial world, and stimulating postdoctoral researchers to improve their skills in maximising the value of their research and to develop their careers, taking a step towards industry. Inter-sectoral mobility is encouraged during the fellowship. There are innovation mandates leading to the establishment of a spin-off company (so-called spin-off mandates) and those involving cooperation with existing companies. The annual budget is some EUR2 to 3 million. Approximately 40 mandates are granted yearly. In the Wallonia-Brussels Federation (FWB), one of the objectives of the Marshall Plan 2.Green is to encourage enterprise competitiveness and attractiveness and promote research and innovation, in close linkage with enterprises. In addition, the Wallonia-Brussels Federation intends, as part of Marshall 2.Green (2009-2014), to promote the recognition of the years preparing for a doctorate as relevant job experience in the public sector (in French speaking Belgium), so that these years can be taken into account in the salary scale of the young civil servants/doctorate holders. This proposal has been approved by the governments of Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation and is under the responsibility of the Minister of Public Service.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Belgium has set up specific laws or actions for implementating EU legislation in the field of research.  The country has set up a gender equality strategy in research institutions.

There are essentially soft measures launched at Federal level and by the Flemish and French Communities in terms of gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research. In Flanders, an action plan on Gender Equality in academia was adopted in 2012. The Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers adopted in 2011 also contains several orientations to improve gender balance in the research community.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 85.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations which that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The country has measures supporting return after parental leave.

At Federal level, and in the Flemish and French Communities, permanent researchers enjoy the same rights for maternity leave as all employees. They also provide mechanisms for the suspension of the grants during maternity leave.

The country provides incentives for recruiting female researchers.

Parental leave:

In addition to social security provisions (including maternity leave provisions), the Walloon Government ensures that all researchers enjoy the same rights to grant extension and alternative incomes during maternity leave. The provisions are applicable to researchers with fixed-term contracts as well as grant beneficiaries.

The FRS-FNRS allows for an extension of a mandate or a grant when a fixed-term mandate or a grant is suspended due to maternity, paternal or adoption leave, for a period equal to that of the suspension. A replacement income is then provided by the healthcare body (as is also the case for open-ended mandates) and a complement is provided by the FRS-FNRS to compensate for the loss of income.

The FWO for example extends the fellowship of female researchers with one year to compensate for the pregnancy leave. In Flanders, this follows a decision from the Flemish Government dated 13 July 2007 on setting up a quota of a maximum of two thirds of one sexes in boards that advice government or individual ministers. This applies for example to the internal scientific advisors of the Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT).

Balanced participation between men and women:

The Flemish action plan on Gender Equality in academia and the Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers were followed by actions such as the joint interuniversity master Gender Studies established by the five Flemish universities.

The Collaboration agreement with the Flanders Scientific Research Fund (FSR) 2012-2016 specifically mentions the need for more (female) researchers, more international researchers and better research conditions in Flanders.

At the end of May 2012 the  Flemish’ inter-university Council (VLIR) submitted the Actieplan (Action Plan) Gender Hoger Onderwijs (Action Plan Gender Higher education) to ensure that gender policy at universities is developed from the bottom up. The Flemish Interuniversity Council (Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad/VLIR) set up the Gender at Universities high-level action group. The group aims to improve the gender balance among professors, researchers and students by a gender action plan at the level of the universities. In the course of 2013, this action plan will be translated into an interuniversity charter on gender equality that will contain obligatory clauses.

The new legislation regarding the research funding through the special research funds (valid from 1 January 2013) pays a lot of attention to the gender balance in the universities:

-           One of the performance indicators used to calculate the sum per university is a diversity parameter that looks at the number of female researchers at postdoctoral and permanent level

- If one of the sexes at postdoctoral and permanent level (per faculty)is under represented, in recruitment procedures with equal candidates priority must be given to the underrepresented sex.

- Administrative boards, research councils and selection juries must be gender balanced.

- The headmasters of the universities of the Flemish Community are required to submit (by early 2014) a proposal on the actions to be taken in favour of the gender balance.

- Labour law and rules are not only affecting researchers but all other labour market participants. In this respect, the Government Agreement of 1 December 2011, the basis for the new federal government, states the extension of anonymous curriculum vitae for applications in the public sector (first round). A specific law will also be established concerning equal pay.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the European Research Area (ERA) compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research performing-organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

There seems to be no policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 45.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, the country has set up targets for the participation of the under represented sex in decision making bodies of Research Performing Organisations.

The Flemish action plan on Gender Equality in academia and the Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers require a better gender balance in committees. However, they do include neither identified target nor mechanisms.

See also the new legislation regarding research funding through the special research funds (valid from 1 January 2013):

Administrative boards, research councils and selection juries must be gender balanced.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 34.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, no gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations could be identified.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Belgium is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, Belgium has a proactive policy on open access to scientific publications:

- In 2007, Belgian public funding organisations signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access.

-           In October 2012, the ministers of Science and Research at federal level and from each Community signed a Declaration on open access in Brussels in which they agreed to make open access the default for all Belgian research output.

- The main funding agencies (FWO and F.R.S.-FNRS) are obliged to self-archive all articles coming from research funded by them.

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, according to OpenAire Belgian fiche FWO is studying an obligation for research that it funds to deposit relevant raw datasets.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 50.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support open access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, The DRIVER project led by the University of Ghent played an important role to promote open access awareness in the scientific community and among repository managers. It was followed by other initiatives, in particular from the University of Liège.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Belgium has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. However, on the Community and regional level open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations is supported in various ways.

Several programmes are implemented to facilitate knowledge transfer between public and private sector. Nearly all the items identified in this report are covered. However, distinct measures are established by each Community, and an item can be covered by one and not by the other, as described below.

Funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programmes

Strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Belgium

o          Support to networking and communication activities with the private sector (e.g. academia-private sector networks, alumni networks, platforms, job fairs).

The French Community PRODOC programme promotes exchanges between researchers and private sector via events such as job forums.

o          Support to the implementation of research training agreements with private sector organisations

In Flanders, IWT Innovation mandates are set up with the objective of connecting the academic and the industrial world.

o          Support to structured programmes for placements in the private sector (e.g. internships) for researchers.

In Wallonia, the programme FIRST Entreprise provides support to companies to train young researchers. In Flanders, the Baekeland programme funds doctoral projects carried out at a Flemish university in close cooperation with a company.

o          Support to the implementation of bilateral agreements with non-public organisations for specific projects (e.g. private sector, including the Industry and voluntary sector).

Both Communities support technology transfer offices (TTOs) that must stimulate exchanges with the private sector.

Moreover, Flanders and Wallonia also develop and support innovation platforms responsible for competence poles to stimulate cooperation between public research and industry.

In Flanders, the IWT has adapted the selection criteria for the annual call for VIS-trajectories. The aim is to increase the success rate of VIS-trajectories that also target innovation followers. Moreover, a specific (pilot) call was launched in 2013 for VIS-trajectories for innovation followers (VIS-trajectIV). The aim of this is to increase the transfer of innovation to the market (16 projects were selected for support of in total EUR4.6 million).

In Wallonia, a main action to strengthen relations between public research and academia is the establishment of public-private partnerships (PPPs) for R&D. It supports projects financed by the region, private sector and public research organisations on strategic research for companies. The aim is to foster synergies between private and public research.

o          Support to intellectual property right (IPR) including patents.

In Wallonia, financial support to patent is provided to public research organisations since they can demonstrate the potential economic value of the patent.

o          Support the creation, management and/or follow-up of spin-offs.

Wallonia, Brussels and Flanders established specific funding programmes to support spin-offs: Venture cap for spin-off and FIRST Spin-off in Wallonia; Spin-off in Brussels; and in Flanders there exist the Innovation Mezzanine, the SOFI fund, Vinnof, and ARKimedes fund (managed by PMV).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 69.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Belgium who responded to the survey and support national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, no research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) could be identified.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with implementation of the Digital ERA, Belgium has not set up a strategy for its implementation. However, the country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.

At Federal level, BELSPO has established an operational unit named BELNET responsible for the design and network management and research education in Belgium. Nearly 200 institutions representing more than 650 000 users are connected to BELNET. It provides on-request services such as a platform for e-collaboration or video conferencing. At Community level, Flanders developed virtual labs in the areas of medicine and new materials.

Concerning digital services, the country provides premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 65.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Belgium was a member of an identity federation in 2011. It was a member of an identity federation in 2013. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Belgium, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 35 research performing organisations in Belgium answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 19.2% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Belgium shows that 24.1 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 55.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 20.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 87.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 11.4 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.7 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Some large universities and research institutes did not reply to the survey, which diminishes the representativeness of the results of the research performance organisations.

For the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it should be noted that part of the funding of private industry research takes place directly by ministries without intervention by any funding organisation.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Brussels‐Capital Region strategy for Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) - up-date || 2012 || X ||

Flanders : Smart Specialisation strategy concept paper || 2013 || X || X

Indicators' database of BELSPO || 2012 || X ||

WAL-TECH || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Research strategy 2011-2015 of Wallonia and the Brussels-Wallonia federation || 2012 || X ||

Calls on international experts for the evaluation of fellowships and projects applications || || ||

Wallonia's Marshall Plan 2.Green || 2012 || X ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Peer Assessment of the Walloon regional innovation system (OECD) || 2012 || X ||

Fundamental Strategic Research Fund || 2012 || X ||

Belgian Research Action through Interdisciplinary Networks (BRAIN_be) || 2012 || X ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Adoption of a joint action plan shared by the  governments of Flanders, Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation for boosting economic activity through R&D || 2012 || X ||

Joint call Belgium/India || 2011 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Joint call for micro awareness-raising projects in 2011 called ‘Later, I will be Einstein or Marie Curie' Regions Wallonia/ Brussels and French speaking community || 2011 || ||

Bilateral agreements for economic, industrial, scientific and technological cooperation with third countries || || ||

Joint call for RDI projects- WB GREEN (Brussels Region and Wallonia) || 2012 || X ||

Flanders: Interreg programme participation || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Financing of research infrastructure investments || || ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Euraxess Belgium || || ||

‘Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for Researchers’ || 2012 || X ||

Opening up recruitment of researchers || || ||

Improve  objectivity and transparency of decision making on recruitment and researchers career paths, including equal opportunities || || ||

Attractive careers

Training young researchers and opening up career prospects || 2011 || ||

Brussels Capital region - DOCTRIS || || ||

Flanders – Baekeland mandates            innovation mandates || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Collaboration agreement  with the Flanders Scientific Research Fund (FSR) 2012-2016 || 2012 || X ||

Minimum % of experts of the same sex in scientific evaluation panels || || ||

Gender at Universities high-level action group || 2013 || X || X

Wallonia-Brussels Partnership for researchers || 2011 || ||

Flanders : Gender Action Plan || 2012 || X ||

Women and Science committee Wallonia-Brussels Federation || || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open Access scheme || || ||

Brussels Declaration on Open Access || 2012 || X ||

STIS service of BELSPO || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Wallonia - Second “Public Private Partnership” (PPP) call || || ||

Excellence centres - Flanders || 2012 || X ||

Public-Private Partnership (PPP 2012) Programme || 2012 || X ||

Support of interface technology transfer offices || || ||

"Innovation centre Flanders" - Concept Note || 2012 || X ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The Bulgarian Government has adopted a series of measures aimed at modernising the national research and development (R&D) structures. The Bulgarian National Reform Programme (NRP) 2013 identifies the need to improve the efficiency of public spending for R&D by leveraging funds to attract more private capital as key for achieving its national target of 1.5% of GDP in 2020.

The highest policy-making body of the Bulgarian research system is the National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria (Parliament) which decides the state budget to be allocated for research in the country, as well as its distribution. Its Standing Committee on Education, Science, Children, Youths and Sports plays an important role. Since 2012 the Parliament has controlled the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences research activities directly.

Research and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Science (MEYS) and  the Ministry of Economy, and Energy co-shares some responsibilities for designing and implementing the national R&D policy. The main competitive national public R&D funding instruments are the National Innovation Fund (NIF) and the National Science Fund (NSF).

The biggest research performers in Bulgaria are the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS), the Agricultural Academy and some of the Bulgarian universities. A recent trend is for research to be carried out in smaller private sector organisations. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food hosts the Agricultural Academy, which champions Bulgarian research policy in agriculture. Similarly, the Ministry of Health oversees the National Centre of Public Health Protection. The core portion of Bulgarian scientists is employed in public R&D organisations and higher education establishments, while the percentage of scientists in business organisations is 14% of the total.

The country has not adopted a coherent national research and innovation strategy to underpin the research, development and innovation policy. The National Strategy for Scientific Research to 2020, as of 2011, is the key policy document, which sets five priority areas for the development of research in Bulgaria. Public competitive R&D project grants, support for R&D infrastructures, structural reform of public research institute sector are becoming important characteristic of the national policy. However, some necessary strategic documents and measures are still under preparation such as the Innovation Strategy, announced already in 2011.

The latest R&I policy developments in the country are related to the published drafts for the operational programme (OP), called “Science and Education for Smart Growth 2014-2020” (version 02.06.2014) and „Innovation and Competitiveness” (version 02.06.2014), both approved by the Council of Ministers.

In terms of R&Dfunding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Bulgaria represented EUR 14 per inhabitant in 2012, less than 10% of the EU28 average (EUR 179).  In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7% of total government expenditures and 0.2% of Gross Domestic Product (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows s that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Bulgaria has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Bulgaria, measured as percentage of public government expenditure evolved negatively, but less negatively than the evolution observed at EU 27 level. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Bulgaria than the regression observed in EU28.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Since 2010, the competitive project-based R&I funding mechanisms are prevailing the institutional ones. The inflow of EU Cohesion and Structural Funds in 2010 and 2011 has considerably increased the share of competitive public funding for R&D.

The “Regulation No. 9” allows each Higher education institution (HEI) to dedicate funds (up to 10%) of its total R&D budget to activities, related to their current financing and support, allocated on competitive basis. Progress must be reported to MEYS every six months.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 80 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support project-based funding  is higher than the EU average.

The National Evaluation and Accreditation Agency has introduced criteria compatible with the European standards, as norms expressed about desired practices, developed and applied for the institutional and programme accreditation, evaluation of the projects for opening or transforming HEIs. The Agency defined a system for post-accreditation monitoring and control and the basis for contacts with similar institutions and associations in Europe.

Funding instruments should respect peer review principles, however submitting proposals only in Bulgarian, in some cases, may in fact hamper the foreign review if needed.  Starting from 2014 the project proposals submitted to the National Science Fund should be submitted in Bulgarian and in English and the evaluation panels should involve foreign reviewers.

Creating national centres of excellence and competence should embrace capacity and potential for innovation growth both of the research institutes and universities working in partnership with the industry and international partners. They will be supported only after an international evaluation of the proofs of concept (deadline for submission 30 May 2014) and a valorisation of their ten year Research and Innovation Strategic Agenda.

One international evaluation and consultation of research organisation has been undertaken so far by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS), performed jointly by the European Science Foundation (ESF) and ALLEA. The evaluation had significant impact on the reform, taking place in the BAS during the period 2010-2012 in the direction of programme oriented organisation of research activities.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

The institutional funding available for R&D in universities and in the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences is further distributed to research projects on the basis of competitive calls. The R&D funding available, according to law, is 10% of the total state subsidy, available for each university (in spite of some fluctuations in practice). Similar is the situation in BAS, where funds are allocated by the General assembly, upon approval from the Board of trustees. The allocation of the state subsidy among the 42 BAS institutes is based on recent research performance and results of international evaluation. However, institutional funding is seldomly allocated based on an institutional assessment.

Sources about research funding instruments in the Higher Education Sector are not that many. The European University Association (2009) indicated that, in Bulgaria, funding is distributed using line-item budgets, which implies that universities receive their funding for already allocated cost items and/or activities (European university funding and financial autonomy, DG Joint Research Centre, 2011).

In 2010 a new Law on development of academic staff has been introduced, regulating the acquisition of scientific degrees and academic positions based on autonomy, free choice of scientific development and objectivity in his assessment, public interest and international recognition and exchange of information when conducting procedures.

The government announced its intention to put in place a system of regular international evaluation of public research funding organisations (NSF) and research performing organisation.

The ranking of universities, launched in 2010, provides the government with a tool for performance-based allocations. However, the share of funds allocated according to this ranking is comparatively small and is could be better focused on R&I. The ranking system compiles information and data for more than 70 indicators, which measure different aspects of university activities including teaching and learning, university environment, welfare and administrative services, science and research, prestige, career development and relevance to the labour market.

The draft strategy for developing higher education foresees a new methodology for determining the differentiated standards for maintenance of educating a student based on the real value of education and research performed in any professional field. It also envisages measures for strengthening the research potential and innovative developments in high school.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that the allocation of institutional funding is not based on institutional assessment.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

According to the ERAWATCH report Bulgaria needs to set more precise guidelines to elaborate and implement effectively support measures in order to define and implement common research agenda on grand challenges. The existing set of priorities of the research agenda are not yet sufficiently connected to meeting grand challenges.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not support transnational cooperation.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Bulgaria dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme, the share of participation of Bulgaria in total participation is 0.6% and the country received 0.3% of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 13 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 0.1% of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3% of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in one of the 10 on-going initiatives, namely the Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe.

Bulgaria has been involved in 25 joint calls.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two out of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 20 ERA-NETs, of which 8 are currently still running. The country also has participated in one ERA-NET Plus actions in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

International cooperation in the fields of education, higher education, science and technology is based on bilateral and multilateral international agreements and implementation of cooperative programmes. Bulgaria has bilateral scientific agreements with eight third countries among which joint research programmes are running with Ukraine, India, China and Switzerland.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

No relevant information was found about the degree of implementation of mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards as a basis for national funding decisions (peer review standards defined in ESF peer review guide). A Formal comprehensive evaluation of Bulgaria’s participation in the Framework Programmes of the EU is planned for 2014.  Bulgaria cooperates with the META group in the project MIRRIS (Mobilising Institutional Reforms in Research and Innovation Systems), which aims at encouraging a better exploitation of European research and innovation programmes and participation in the European Research Area of the 13 target countries by setting up a process of analysis, dialogue, mutual learning among key concerned stakeholders, namely research, innovation and institutional actors.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Bulgaria allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is lower than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Bulgaria participates in the following large international research infrastructures: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR)-Dubna and European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA).

The country contributes 2,54% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures (RI) included in the ESFRI Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of six of them (12%. of the RI in the Roadmap).

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research Infrastructures, Bulgaria is committed to fund one RI, namely: CLARIN-ERIC.

With regards participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Bulgaria is not yet involved in any of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of Research Infrastructures, the national roadmap on research infrastructures was published in 2010 and does include references to the participation of Bulgaria in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. Seven of the projects had been supported at national level for preparatory phase. Still, Bulgaria lacks financial, industrial and human potential for construction and maintenance of big research infrastructures. Currently an update of the roadmap is ongoing, following an international evaluation by ESFRI experts. It will include national research centres with proven capacity or creating new to serve as regional partner facilities (RPFs) or nodes/hubs of distributed pan-European Research Infrastructures. RIs should be financed jointly by national funds and under the OP” Science and Education for Smart Growth” 2014-2020.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

While the National Strategy of Scientific Research 2020 defines ambitious objectives towards cross-border access to research infrastructures, its implementation is still a challenge.

For the RI coordinated by Bulgaria, access has been funded by the European Commission

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Bulgaria in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Bulgaria_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

There were 11,902 FTE researchers in Bulgaria in 2011. This represents 3.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 3.0 among the Innovation Union reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 0.4 in Bulgaria compared with 9.0 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

According to the guidance on implementation of the Law on Development of Academic Staff, all open research positions must be published in the Bulgarian Official Journal and on the institutional web sites - though they are mainly published in Bulgarian. The new law eliminates the age criterion formerly applied to applicants for scientific positions, including post-doctorate positions, provides defined evaluation criteria which become available to the candidates, and it also provides feedback on the decisions taken by the scientific commission. Job vacancies are also published on other platforms (e.g. the labour agency) and the EURAXESS jobs portal, but these are not statutory requirements.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

Representatives of the Bulgarian Rectors Council have signed the ‘Charter & Code’ in 2007. By May 2014, 2 Bulgarian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 1 had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The “Law on the Development of Academic Staff” enables universities to define their own staff policy. In addition, it provides a mechanism for regulating the careers of scientific personnel. The implementation of the new Law will result in a qualification and career development system for academic staff - planned for the end of 2014.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.6 in 2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

Under the Bulgarian Labour Code, all PhD students receive fixed grants (including social security cover) for three years. Universities and research institutes can apply for funding for their doctoral candidates from the state budget based on open competition. In order to improve research funding opportunities, the National Science Fund (NSF) offers doctoral candidates the possibility of participating in competition-based science projects which can serve as an additional source of income. Approximately 30% of the resources of the NSF are dedicated to young researchers. In addition to new policies aimed at improving the research profession in Bulgaria, bilateral programmes, such as the Sciex Programme with Switzerland, are considered not only to be a means of improving researchers’ funding opportunities, but also as instruments for increasing the quality of doctoral training in Bulgaria.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 3.1% in Bulgaria compared with 1.7% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 3.8% in Bulgaria compared with 2.0% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

There are more outbound researchers than those wishing to pursue a career in Bulgaria. The Sciex Programme with Switzerland and other bilateral research programmes support researchers’ outbound mobility and foster knowledge transfer. The Science + Business project supports young researchers in gaining practical work experience in foreign research institutions. As part of this initiative, young researchers receive short-term training abroad in foreign research infrastructures.

The Science + Business Project provides a platform for researchers to carry out projects in collaboration with industry. Supported by universities, research institutes and businesses, the scheme fosters skills and knowledge transfer between the different parties. Research projects must address societal challenges and provide solutions which are market-oriented.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Gender equality is regulated at horizontal level. The transposition of the European directive on gender equality (Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000) provides for equal treatment of women and men in research. In Bulgaria more women than men are involved in the research profession. It is difficult to attract men into research careers due to the low salaries in the public research sector.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The Labour Code grants women researchers the right to interrupt and extend their contract during maternity leave. However, other contracts (stipends, fellowships, or equivalent) do not guarantee the right to maternity leave. The right depends on the contractual conditions and on the researcher's level of income in the previous 18 months.

Bulgaria supports the L’Oreal and UNESCO ‘For Women in Science programme’ and co-funds the L’Oreal national fellowship programme.

In 2012 a Bulgarian Centre of Women in Technology (BCWT) was launched to promote more girls and women in the technology sector.

Bulgaria is one of the few countries reporting higher success rates of female researchers for grant applications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

There are no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes, however there are some stakeholder initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 22.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Objective 3 of the National Strategy for Promotion of Gender Equality for the period 2009-2015 clearly states the importance of the promotion of gender equality in governance and decision-making bodies in the development of science.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 27.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Bulgaria is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the key strategy document is the National Reform Programme 2012-2014 which points to the need to develop strategic long-term infrastructures to support the building and maintaining of the high-performing computing infrastructure, and access to different network infrastructures like GRID networks, European digital data bases.

The Bulgarian research community is informed about the benefits of open access and uses open access research publications. There is a certain level of awareness among libraries, though still very few institutions are involved in managing repositories. At a special meeting of the Association of University Libraries (AUL) in 2010, the steps to build open repositories were outlined.

A national concept and an action plan for open access are under development by a working group to the Ministry of Education and Science.

The Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS) announced its intention to establish a network of scientific open access centres. The Institute of Mathematics and Informatics at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (IMI-BAS) will coordinate the Bulgarian network and will provide support for academic institutions and researchers. IMI-BAS will launch a national project to develop the research infrastructure and digital repositories for researchers, educators, public bodies and companies who need contemporary scientific and education information and resources (Implementing Open Access Mandates in Europe, 2012).

Related to open access to publications, different practices are applied in the country and there is not enough information available to quantify the preferred types of open access use. There is a specific programme of the NSF supporting open access (OA) for covering OA-related costs. Different practices are applied in the country but the preference in the institutions is for the Green model open access use. The OA policy is envisaged to become mandatory for all public research funding organisations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 15.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting Open Access to data.

With respect to repositories, as of August 2012, there were six Bulgarian open access repositories registered in Open-door: those of the New Bulgarian University, IMI-BAS (Bulgarian Digital Mathematics Library and Bulgarian Openaire Repository), Burgas Free University, Sofia University “St. Kl. Ohridski”, and Medical University of Sofia. Apart from them there is a repository at Tsenov Academy of Economics and a pilot repository of the University of Rouse.

There are currently 32 Bulgarian open access journals available in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). In addition, a pilot repository of the University of Rousse and the Medical University of Sofia (MU Sofia) is now being tested to become the Electronic Repository of the Central Medical Library of MU Sofia. 

The Bulgarian Current Research Information System (BulCRIS) is developed and maintained by MEYS. (BulCRIS) is a starting point for detailed information about Bulgaria’s research, development and innovation resources, and for staying in touch with the latest innovations. BulCRIS is targeted to bring together the abilities of universities and institutes in Bulgaria, and of organisations throughout the world to help them make efficient use of these resources.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, the National Strategy of Scientific Research provides measures aiming to promote KT between public and private sectors. The draft of the new Law on innovation also suggests such measures. Even though there is not an explicit national strategy to promote knowledge transfer, measures exist to foster KT at stakeholder level. More than 40 Knowledge transfer offices are supported by special funding.

The 2014 NRP announces the development of a national bulletin for monitoring the condition of the links between business and science.

Strategic partnership between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Bulgaria. As an important step in that direction is the establishment of the first science and technology park in Sofia, co-financed by the ERDF for around EUR 50 million, which should grow into a core national R&I hub and attract leading local and international scientists.

Within the OP “Human Resources and development” Science and business project an integrated platform was developed and launched in April 2013. It provides a meeting point between science and business for the purpose of developing partnerships and joint work on projects (NRP 2014).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Bulgaria who responded to the survey and support national support to KT and OI, Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of Digital ERA a national policy has been initiated by the research community. As a result, since 2008, MEYS provides  national access for 58 research institutions, public and private universities, hospital’s research centers to scientific information, including bibliometric resources and analytical tools.

Additionally, the Bulgarian Information Consortium was set-up, an organization of  38 members representing academic, public research organisations and libraries aimed at sharing good practice and resource development.

Concerning digital services, the Commission could not identify support to their provision.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 53.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 32.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Bulgaria was a member of an identity federation in 2011.

From 2009 to 2012 the institute of Technology and Development Foundation participated in a FP7 Project OpenScout aiming at providing an education service via internet to enable users to easily find, access, use and exchange open content for management of education and training.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Bulgaria, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 41 research performing organisations in Bulgaria answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 31.7% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Bulgaria shows that 39.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 51.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 9.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 59.6 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 37.7 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 2.8 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Finally, it should be noted that the major research funding organisations in Bulgaria did not respond to the ERA survey which may have an incidence on the analysis of the state of implementation of ERA by research funders.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation (draft) || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Operational Programme "Science and Eductaion for Smart Growth" || 2014 || X || X

Draft regulation for monitoring and evaluation of scientific research activities || 2011 || ||

Joint ESF and ALLEA International evaluation “Research at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences” || 2009 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Operational Programme "Competitiveness" || 2007 || ||

National Strategy for Scientific Research 2020 || 2011 || ||

National Innovation Fund - competitive grants 2012 || 2012 || X ||

Law on Higher Education || 1995 || ||

Law on Scientific Research Promotion || 2003 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National research infrastructure roadmap, on-going update || 2010 || ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

EURAXESS BULGARIA portal || || ||

Attractive careers

Ordonance in accordance with  European Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third country nationals for the purposes of scientific research || 2008 || ||

Operational programme “Human resource development”(OP HRD) || || ||

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Support to doctoral training || 2012 || X ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Harmonisation of strategic documents according to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 || 2000 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Support to Open Access || 2014 || X || X

Open access infrastructure for research in Europe (OPEN AIRE) || 2010 || ||

National digital library || 2006 || ||

The world’s largest bibliographic database, providing the foundation of cooperative library services in metadata management, discovery, resource sharing and collection management (OCLC WorldCat® || 2008 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

"Science-Business" project || 2011 || ||

Draft Law on Innovations || 2013 || X || X

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) system in Cyprus is relatively new and is evolving with the aim to increase efficiency and modernise the Government, research and productive sector cooperation. At the operational level of the Directorate General of European Programmes, Coordination and Development (DGEPCD), an independent government agency, is entrusted with the formulation of the research and innovation strategy (R&I), the identification of objectives and the introduction of policy measures aimed at the promotion of research activities in Cyprus. At the implementation level, most of the R&I activities are integrated under the Research Promotion Foundation (RPF), an autonomous agency governed by a 12-member board, chaired by the current Permanent Secretary of DGEPCD under the supervision of the DGEPCD. The Foundation is fully supported by the Government and its resources are derived mostly from the Ministry of Finance through the DGEPCD. The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism (MCIT) is responsible for industrial policy, including the promotion of technology and entrepreneurship.

The System for Research, Technological Development and Innovation is governed by the National Research and Innovation Council (NRIC), made up of competent ministers, chaired by the President of the Republic and advised by the Cyprus Scientific Council (CSC). The latter is composed of internationally-recognised scientists.

The main research performer group are the public research institutes and universities. Private Universities followed by private sector organisations and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Recently, a systematic effort was initiatated in order, (a) to evaluate the current research and innovation system and procedures in Cyprus and to give recommendations for its adjustment and upgrade so it becomes more effective and efficient and (b) to adopt explicit multi-annual RTDI priorities.

The National Committee for Research, Innovation and Technological Development (NCRITD) was established by the Council of Ministers, in September 2013. This Committee was entrusted with the task of evaluating the current R&I systems and procedures in Cyprus and give recommendations for its adjustment and upgrading so it becomes more effective and efficient.  The work of the NCRITD was completed in March 2014 and its outcomes submitted to the President. The report of the NCRITD proposes creating a new system structured in four levels (strategic, political, operational/implementation and research stakeholders), which integrates Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The study proposes among others, to appoint a Commissioner for Research Innovation and Entrepreneurship, create a new Directorate General for Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship under the Ministry of Finance,  establish an Advisory Committee and redesign the role of the Research Promotion Foundation (RPF) in order to accommodate Technology Transfer activities. The study is currently being reviewed by the Presidency.

The joint effort of the RPF and a research team of the Cyprus Technology University is to propose a smart specialisation strategy based on desk research, experience and a field survey (800 companies) and discussed with a Steering Committee composed of national stakeholders. It is expected that the Government will receive all input by the end of June 2014 and adopt priorities by the Summer.

Additionally, the preparation of the Smart Specialisation Strategy for Cyprus, an ex-ante conditionality for the absorption of European Structural and Investment Funds for R&I, was initiated in mid-2013 by DGEPCD and is expected to be finalised in September 2014. An extensive analysis of the national R&I priorities has been conducted with the aim of maximising the knowledge-based development potential of the Cyprus economy through targeted support to R&I in the sectors where Cyprus has a competitive advantage. The sectors identified through this process are tourism, energy, construction, shipping, health, information and communication technology (ICT) and environment.  The overall results of the Smart Specialisation Strategy in line with the recommendations of the NCRITD, will be used to determine the vision and the formulation of a new Strategy for Research and Innovation. This Strategy will be implemented through the programmes of the Research Promotion Foundation which is the main funding agency for research and innovation in Cyprus.

In order to encourage cooperation between academia and industry, a project under the name 'Development and operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices in Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus', involving a consortium of six Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus, was awarded in 2009. Six Industry Liaison Offices, three public and three private Universities, are in full development and operation at the moment.

The Government of Cyprus is investigating the possibility for creating a Science Technology Park (STP) in the form of a Knowledge Park with the scope of promoting research, innovation and technology. In the short term, the main objective of the STP will be to enhance the entrepreneurial and industrial development of Cyprus. Even more in the long term the objective will focus on transforming  Cyprus into a regional research and innovation center.

Finally, it should me mentioned that due to the prevailing economic crisis in the country and the consequent liquidity constraints, the main source of public funding for the implementation, the new R&I Strategy is expected to derive from the European Structrual and Investment Funds (ESIF) for the period 2014-20 in Cyprus. The bulk of the funding that will be allocated for R&I from the ESIF operational programme (OP) for Cyprus will be spent through the DESMI 2014-2020, which is the National Framework Programme for R&I designed and implemented by the Research Promotion Foundation. In parallel, the Technology Service of Ministry of Energy, Commerce Industry and Tourism will implement schemes for specifically promoting business innovation.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Cyprus represented EUR 81 per inhabitant in 2012, less than half the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.9 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat).

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The major sources for project-based funding of R&D activities are the programmes launched by the Research Promotion Foundation (RPF). Grants are distributed through the multiannual competition-based National Framework Programme (NFP) for Research and Technological Development (DESMI). Currently, funding comes from the 2008-2010 programme. A new multiannual programme is under preparation based on the results of the Smart Specialisation Strategy for R&I. This Strategy will be implemented through the programmes of the RPF which is the main funding agency for R&I in Cyprus. As mentioned before, the sectors identified from this Strategy, which are tourism, energy, construction, shipping, health, ICT and environment, will be thematic areas where the multiannual programme will focus. 

Once the priorities are formally adopted by the Government, the RPF will launch new calls in autumn 2014 at the earliest. Competitive funding addresses both basic and applied research in the context of DESMI.

Project-based funding is composed of the calls of the RPF and most recently the innovation call of the Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism. Although no precise data are published on an annual basis, the delays in new calls by the RPF since 2011 result in a de facto increase of the share of institutional funding.

Historically institutional funding was block-funding. Only State aid for Research and Innovation took the form of competitive funding. Since the adoption of DESMI, additional competitive funding was used for individual research teams and collaborative projects. DESMI 2009-2010 was running until recently with five priority axes. Multidisciplinary development of Research, Development of Human Resources for Research, Development of Research and Innovation for Enterprises, Development of Research Infrastructures, Development of International Networking and Collaborations. A total of 1 126 proposals were submitted for funding by DESMI 2009-2010. However, due to financial constraints and provisional governance problems in the RPF, competitive funding has diminished since 2011. RPF announced that the budget of all research proposals would decrease by 35 %. 

The only new competitive call launched in 2012 was the 'Enhancement of Business Innovation in Cyprus', launched by the Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism. A total of 41 proposals were approved for funding, with a total budget of EUR6.2 million, 62.9 % out of which will come from public funding. New similar calls were announced for the new programming period 2014-2020. As 2013 was marked by the financial crisis and the end of the programming period no funds were released for new calls.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are based on selection panels composed of Greek researchers. When DESMI competitive calls are launched the selection of projects relies on international peer review. This process was designed independently of the European Research Area (ERA) requirements, as the national research community is too small and local peer review only could jeopardise objectivity.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

The government plans institutional funding annually through the state budget. Institutional assessment is partly allocated based on institutional assessment.

Public higher education institutes (HEIs), which benefit from block-funding, have introduced internal research support mechanisms: faculty members apply for a (small) research budget and selection is based on a review process by an internal HEI Committee. Based on a study on the degree of diversification of university budgets and the share of competitive funding, 86 % of the university budget of the University of Cyprus comes from core funding, 2 % comes from competitive funding and 12 % comes from EU funds.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Cyprus allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Cyprus dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Cyprus in total participation is 0.4 % and the country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR90 per inhabitant (EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 19.5 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in five of the 10 on-going initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, Water Challenges for a Changing World, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes, as leader in none of them. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives: EUROSTARS, Ambient Assisted Living.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 20 ERA-NETs, of which nine are currently still running. T

Concerning research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Cyprus has four bilateral agreements with France, Slovenia, Romania and United Kingdom.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy, although bilateral reseach agreements exist with Egypt, Israel, Cuba and the United States.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with Third Countries.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, no budget of organisations' research and development originating from Third Countries could be identified .

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

There is no mutual recognition of evaluations, national funding decisions still follow a rule of path-dependence rather than following evaluations.

There are no other common ex post evaluation procedures except those foreseen and implemented in the context of the European Commission.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

Research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Cyprus participates in the large international research infrastructure (Ris) of the European Space Agency (ESA). In 2012, the country contributed 0.3 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Reserach Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of five of them: European Social Survey, PRACE, DARIAH, KM3NeT, EU SOLARIS. Researchers from Cyprus have also expressed interest in participating and/or are participating in the following projects: European XFEL, CLARIN, BBMRI, ELIXIR and the European Spallation Source. The participation of Cyprus in the above projects does not include the coordination of any of them.

In terms of financial commitments to developing these research infrastructures, Cyprus is not involved.

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Cyprus is not involved.

In May 2013, RPF invited interested parties to express their interest in participating in the ESFRI Roadmap. A total of 40 proposals were submitted by July 2013.  The strategy in investing in pan-European R&Is including those from the ESFRI roadmap will be part of the National Strategy for the period 2014-2020. Additionally in June 2013, RPF announced  the launch of an excercise for mapping the Cyprus Research landscape. As part of this procedure the RPF, in cooperation with the Cyprus Science Council, initiated the examination of the current situation in order to facilitate the formulation of a national roadmap for R&Is. The study uses 22 R&D indices and two structured questionnaires addressed to research institutions and researchers.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Cyprus in the Researchers Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Cyprus_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 915 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Cyprus in 2011. This represents 2.1 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovations Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 66.5 in Cyprus compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 54 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Recruitment for research positions in Cyprus is considered open and transparent. All publicly-funded vacancies are published on the Cyprus Government Gazette official website, on local press websites and on the Cyprus EURAXESS portal. Job vacancies are often published in English.

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 65.5 in the Republic of Cyprus compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

All publicly-funded research jobs must be advertised online on the EURAXESS jobs portal. In addition, the social security services of the Republic of Cyprus have created a portal for employers and employees on social security legislation and the implementation of Council Regulation 1408/71 on 'the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community'.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The RPF serves as the Bridgehead Organisation and Service Centre for the EURAXESS Network in Cyprus. The RPF is responsible for promoting the implementation of the Charter & Code through its networking activities with the research institutes and the dissemination of promotional material.

By May 2014, six Cyprian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which two had received the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The Government of the Republic of Cyprus has adopted a package of measures aimed at training enough researchers to meet its R&D targets and at promoting attractive employment conditions in public research institutions,   training enough researchers to reach Cyprus’ R&D targets, promoting attractive working conditions, and addressing gender and dual career aspects.

However, in the past, the severe economic crisis and the fiscal austerity measures adopted led to a considerable reduction in the budget for R&I, which hampered the adoption and implementation of any new strategy.

On the positive side, the new Government as of March 2013 has announced that a significant effort will be put into R&I as an attempt to exit the financial crisis. As a result of this, a National Committee on Research, Innovation and Technological Development (NCRITD) was set up by the Council of Ministers in September 2013, consisting of distinguished experienced scientists coming from the Cypriot academic, research and business sectors, to review the national R&I system and to give relevant recommendations on its governance to the President of the Republic of Cyprus. The work of the NCRITD was completed in March 2014 and its outcomes submitted to the President. The report of the NCRITD proposes to create a new system structured in four levels (strategic, political, operational/implementation and research stakeholders), which integrates Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The study proposes among others, to appoint a Commissioner for Research Innovation and Entrepreneurship, create of a new Directorate General for Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship under the Ministry of Finance, establish an Advisory Committee and redesign the role of the RPF in order to accommodate Technology Transfer activities. The study is currently being reviewed by the Presidency.

Further to that the Smart Specialisation Strategy for R&I, an ex-ante conditionality for the utilisation of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) for R&I in Cyprus, is expected to be finalised in Spring 2014. The sectors identified through this process are tourism, energy, construction, shipping, health, ICT and environment. 

The outcomes of the two abovementioned reports are expected to prove as useful input to draw up the National 2014-20 R&I Strategy that is expected to be completed by the end of 2014. This Strategy will be implemented, mainly through the programmes of the Research Promotion Foundation, which is the main funding agency for R&I in Cyprus. In parallel, the Technology Service of Ministry of Energy, Commerce Industry and Tourism will implement schemes for specifically promoting business innovation.

Finally, due to the prevailing economic crisis in the country and the consequent liquidity constraints, the main source of public funding implementing the new R&I Strategy is expected to derive from the ESIF for the 2014-20 period in Cyprus.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 0.3 in 2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The on-going scheme for the promotion of innovation in training and development of human resources (HRDA)  aims to encourage enterprises and organisations to prepare and implement proposals that include the research and development of innovative ideas for training and developing of human resources. This scheme is open amongst others to entities such as universities, research institutes and major industries, which deal with R&I in human resources issues.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 9 % in Cyprus compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%.

The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.7% in Cyprus compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

The Government of the Republic of Cyprus has not implemented measures encouraging researchers to spend time as a researcher in another country. However, universities permit their academic staff to take ‘sabbatical leave’ on request for the purpose of expanding their research interests/aspirations, but such provision is not provided for non-academic research staff. Researchers also have the right to participate in research projects/conferences in accordance with the research programme provisions funding opportunities. Language barriers and the cost of accommodation remain the major mobility obstacles for incoming researchers. In addition, the low demand for researchers and PhD holders from local industry impedes inward mobility. However, the fully operational EURAXESS Service Centre in Cyprus, along with the adoption and implementation of the Scientific Visa Package, are two factors that are increasing the number of researchers from abroad coming to Cyprus. The Proselkysh Programme is targeted to young and experienced researchers not residing in Cyprus but wishing to carry out research within a Cypriot host research organisation.

A University-Industry Liaison Offices Network was established in 2010 at the major Universities in Cyprus. The network is composed of six Liaison Offices, with full human resources in place, and a shared web portal and data base hosting registered profiles e.g. academic, laboratory, business and student profiles. The main priorities of the network are to ensure benefits to business and industry through academic research results and vice versa, to maximisee opportunities and employment potential of students/graduates through a student placement framework, to promote cross-national agreements/partnerships with Universities in Europe (similar activities) through student placements and internships, to exploit University research results by Cypriot businesses and encourage research in the Cyprus business Society. 

The operation of the network proved extremely successful, in particular with regards to student placements that reached 937, exceeding by far the initial target of 400 placements.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Gender equality is not a specific topic in the research agenda in Cyprus.

In 2013, there was a decision to join the Gender NET ERA-NET.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 26.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

In Cyprus, as far as eligibility of fellows to participate in the national research programmes for post-doctorates is concerned, in cases where the potential fellow was on a maternity leave, or has served his military service after he/she has obtained his/her PhD title, then the requirement of obtaining his/her doctorate in the past five years could be extended (for maternity leave one year per child could be added, for military service the actual time of service) as this is certified by the competent authorities.

Funding agencies consider leaves of absences in researcher evaluations and project monitoring.

As far as eligibility of fellows to participate in the national research programmes for post-doctorates is concerned, in cases where the potential fellow was on a maternity leave, or has served his military service after he/she has obtained his/her PhD title, then the requirement of obtaining his/her doctorate in the past five years could be extended (for the maternity leave one year per child could be added, for the military service the actual time of service) as this is certified by the competent authorities.

 There are no initiatives to strengthen the gender dimension in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

There are no explicit quotas or quantitative targets. Scientific evaluators are urged to consider the projects positive contribution to gender equality (where applicable) and research funders consider equality and women’s representation in the evaluation process of research projects and project monitoring.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 33.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations could not be identified. However, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers is high in the limited compliance cluster.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, there is no specific document or initiative describing the national policy concerning open data policies in Cyprus. A limited number of local data collections were identified and contacts with the responsible persons are in progress by the Cyprus NOAD (UCY Library).

However within the framework of OpenAIRE & OpenAIREplus projects, the UCY Library supports institutions that hold data sets in various forms and either by digitising or hosting their data in open formats (e.g. project of the digitisation of the Complete Gazetteer of Cyprus, produced by the Land Survey Department of Republic of Cyprus).

Open access dissemination activities are implemented through the Project OpenAIRE and OpenAIREplus, which is represented by the University of Cyprus Library since 2009.

There are three parallel approaches for dissemination purposes:

I.          Central approach: Contacts with the Research Promotion Foundation (which is also one of the NPR for open access) in order to forward informative material via email for Open Access and OpenAIREplus.

II.        Cluster approach:  a) Participation in conferences of librarians/information scientists who acted as multipliers because they were able to disseminate the obligation derived by SC39 FP7 projects to their institutional researchers.  b) We indentified and participated with posters or papers in conferences / information days that took place in our region through which we reached researchers.

III.       Individual approach: Emails were sent to the Cypriot coordinators/partners of SC39 FP7 projects and phone calls were answered for questions and help requests.

Related to open access to publications, in November 2008 the Senate of the University of Cyprus supported and accepted the Library Committee’s proposal to sign the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. (http://oa.mpg.de/lang/en-uk/berlin-prozess/signatoren/). The Berlin declaration was also signed in 2011 by the Governing board of the Cyprus University of Technology.

In October 2009 the Cyprus Academic Library Consortium (CALC) signed a nationwide subscription contract with BMC (Biomed Central) for an open access model to the BMC journals.

Furthermore, a cooperation network was established including different stakeholders in order to increase awareness on open access (OA). One of the results of this networking was the launch of the "Cyprus University of Technology Open Access Author Fund".

It is noted that in the last few years Academic Institutions organise relevant events in Cyprus during the European Open Access Week.

Concerning funding allocations on the 21 October 2013 an agreement between the Cyprus University of Technology Library and the Pharmaceutical company REMEDICA was signed so, Academic publications could be funded with open access terms and be deposited in an open institutional repository.

It should be noted that there are no publishers in Cyprus dealing with academic publications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 45.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, 2 repositories provide access to research data of the HEI  (Cyprus University of Technology and East Mediterranean University).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting open access to data.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Currently there are three Open Access Institutional Repositories in which researchers can submit relevant articles in Cyprus:

•           The repository LEKYTHOS, University of Cyprus

•           The repository KTISIS, Cyprus University of Technology

•           The repository KYPSELI, Open University Cyprus

The University of Cyprus Library works as a partner in OpenAIRE & OpenAIREplus - under the Institutional Repository LEKYTHOS and it allows the imporation and diffusion of publications and primary research data while acting as a point of information, which supports researchers in depositing articles and in diffusing their research.

Also Zenodo which is also a European repository (orphan repository) that enables researchers, scientists, EU projects and institutions to easily access, share and reuse research results in a wide variety of formats including text, spreadsheets, audio, video, and images across all fields of science, is also promoted in Cyprus as an alternative hosting area.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Cyprus has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. Funding organisations have not specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer.

Strategic partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are being developed in Cyprus.

Specifically in order to encourage cooperation between academia and industry, a project under the name 'Development and operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices in Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus', involving a consortium of six Universities operating in the Republic of Cyprus, was awarded in 2009. The project will last six years and is funded by the European Union Social Funds. Its purpose is to strengthen the links and the relationships between Universities and the Industrial environment, in order to develop operations and communication tools for supporting cooperation and placements of students in industry. Six Industry Liaison Offices, three public and three private Universities, are in full development and operation at the moment. It is the first time that a wide channel of communication and common data base among the Universities has been established and furthermore between the academic community and the business world, in order to achieve a wider promotion of knowledge transfer, student internships, and entrepreneurship.

So far, the Industry Liaison Offices (ILOs),  have achieved the following results. They managed to arrange for the placement of approximately 1 500 students in organisations, of which 924 were arranged directly from the ILOs, whereas in the remaining the ILOs provided indirect support. Furthermore, 803 academics and researchers have had their profiles recorded, along with 194 research laboratories. Finally, the ILOs have recorded the profiles of 615 organisations. So far,these results have enhanced the culture of developing co-operation between the academia and the business world.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Cyprus who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector could not be identified.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of the Digital ERA, Cyprus has set up a strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.

In 2012, a Digital Strategy was adopted, aiming to provide a comprehensive plan for the period 2012-2020 and introduce a holistic approach for developing information society in Cyprus. The Strategy focuses on six strategic objectives, (i) Connect Cyprus, (ii) Modernise public administration and provide public electronic services, (iii) Inclusion of all into digital Cyprus, (iv) Education and learning, (v) Digital entrepreneurship, (vi) ICT for the environment.

CyNet is Cyprus' National Research and Education Network. It provides a network infrastructure for the Cypriot Research and Education Community. CyNet connects educational and research institutions. The national backbone of CyNet is connected to the European backbone GEANT2, which is a part of the worldwide community of research and education networks. Through this connection the CyNet backbone is also connected to the Global Internet as well.

Furthermore, due to the manageable size of the country, the UCY Library was able to reach all existing three institutional repositories (Cyprus University of Technology, Open University of Cyprus and University of Cyprus) to meet the guidelines of OPENAIRE compliance.

Drawing from the experience gained through the active participation of the University of Cyprus (UCY) Library in OPENAIRE programs, the Library has undertaken a project to identify, collect and organise all the scientific research output of the University in an open access repository (it should be noted that the UCY research output constitutes 62 % of the country’s total output). This will reinforce and facilitate the ability of UCY Library NOAD to influence the rest of the research institutions and policy makers, ministries and funders towards establishing a regional open access agenda.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Cyprus is not a member of eduGAIN.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the limited ERA compliant cluster in Cyprus, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 13 research performing organisations in Cyprus answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 75.8% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Cyprus shows that 18.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 45.5 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 36.4 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 8.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 90.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.8 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Smart Specialisation Strategy for Research and Innovation (under preparation) || || ||

Cyprus Innovation Strategy (under development) || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Reform of the National Research and Innnovation System || || ||

Enhancement of Business Innovation in Cyprus || 2012 || X ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Innovation Strategy (under review) || 2013 || X || X

DESMI Programme || || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Joint Research Agendas || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Participation in Joint European Programmes || 2014 || X || X

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Roadmap - under preparation || || ||

Call for participation in ESFRI roadmap || 2014 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Euraxess Cyprus || || ||

Attractive careers

Programme for the Support of Young Researchers || 2000 || ||

HR Logo award - Action Plan of the Cyprus Institute of Neurology and Genetics & University of Cyprus for Charter and Code || 2010 || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Participation in COST Programme:"Gender, Society, Technology and Environment” Initiative || 2012 || X ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Law 100/1997 for the protection of mothers (as amended) || 2011 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open access repositories || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Development and Operation of Enterprise Liaison Offices at the Universities Operating in the Republic of Cyprus || 2011 || ||

“Manufuture-CY” || 2012 || X ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Digital Strategy || 2012 || X ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

In 2008, the Czech Republic launched a comprehensive reform of the research and innovation (R&I) system (Act No. 211/2009 Coll, amending Act No.130/2002 Coll.).        

As a result, the Council for Research, Development and Innovation (CRDI) was put in place as an advisory body of the Government, thereby improving the governance and coordination of the system. As a single advisory body for innovation policy (in a broad sense) and for the coordination of public support to research, development and innovation (RDI), the CRDI defines applied research priorities (through different committees), proposes the research, development and innovation State budget and is ultimately responsible for the annual evaluation of research institutions. It also targets funding towards potentially strong and globally competitive research fields and areas with strong potential for applications. The recently-established Government now includes a Vice-Prime Minister in charge of science, research and innovation, who will be chairing the CRDI. While CRDI has become the main coordinating body of the RDI system, the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) and the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MIT) continue to set priorities in the context of the National Innovation Strategy and to administer the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) through their respective operational programmes (OP) dealing with research and development (R&D) and innovation. The MEYS is particularly concerned with public sector R&D, particularly institutional funding for public universities. It is also responsible for international R&D cooperation as well as the support to large R&D infrastructures and fulfilling the administrative function of a central administration body for R&D, e.g. maintaining registers of public research institutes. The MIT is responsible for policies in the domain of business R&D and innovation.

The reform also reorganised R&D funding bodies by creating the Technology Agency of the Czech Republic (TACR), which directly reports to CRDI and is in charge, together with the already existing Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (GACR), of managing most of the targeted R&D competitive funding provided by MIT.

In 2013, the Government updated the 2009-2015 National Research, Development and Innovation Policy of the Czech Republic with a view towards 2020, approved the implementation plan of the National priorities for oriented research, experimental development and innovation (2012-2030) (including the revised six priorities for oriented R&D) and set the goal of preparing the Smart Specialisation Strategy and the Strategy of Internationalisation of Higher Education, research and development and innovation (R&D&I) and Business. All these R&D&I policy documents currently fall under the overarching International Competitiveness Strategy steered by the Office of the Government.

The National Research, Development and Innovation Policy defined long-term national priorities for R&D&I: (1) Quality and productive research system; (2) Effective knowledge transfer; (3) Innovative businesses; and (4) Stable, efficient and strategically-governed research and innovation system. One of its main goals with respect to increasing efficiency of the national R&D&I system is the preparation of a new methodology for R&D&I results evaluation and research organisations institutional funding.

The 2014 National Reform Programme mentions that the Government is going to define a governmental body responsible for innovation by revising the legislation.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Czech Republic represented EUR 99 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant declined a little (EUR 97). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5% of total government expenditures and 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

During the period from 2007 to 2012, several changes in public R&D expenditures were observed. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in the Czech Republic was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in the Czech Republic, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison, in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP evolved positively in the Czech Republic even when it regressed at EU-28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The bulk of competitive project-based funding is administered by GACR, which allocates grants for basic research, and by TACR, which allocates grants for applied research and development. GACR also awards postdoctoral grants with limited funding on an open, merit and competitive basis. GACR has a budget of CZK 3.3 billion (EUR 132 million) in 2013. On the side of applied research and development, there is currently a transition period where TACR is taking over the management of most of MIT's competitive funding. The budget of TACR has grown significantly in recent years from CZK 0.9 billion (EUR 34 million) in 2011, to CZK 2.8 billlion (EUR 113 milllion) in 2013 to CZK 2.6 billion in 2013. In addition, five other ministries administer their own (relatively small) competitive research funds in their respective domains (agriculture, health, defence, interior, and culture). The coordination between all research programmes (funded from the national budget) is ensured by CDRI.

In the 2014 National Reform Programme, the Czech Government mentions that it will start preparing a new methodology for evaluating programmes that targeted support of research, development and innovation, including ex ante, interim and ex post stages, which should be finalised by the end of 2014.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 53.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

In order to guarantee the scientific excellence of funded projects, both GACR and TACR use peer review in the framework of their calls of proposals and international reviewers for their evaluation.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Since the 2008 reform, there has been a constant decrease in institutional funding from 56 % in 2009 to 51 % in 2012. In its outlook for 2014, the CRDI envisages a further decrease to 47 % in 2014 and 2015.

In principle any research organisation, irrespectively of its public/private status, is entitled to receive institutional support from the state R&D budget on the basis of the excellence of the R&D results, which the organisation achieved in a specified time frame.   

The largest recipients of institutional funding are on the one hand institutes of the Academy of Science of the Czech Republic (ASCR) and on the other, other public research institutes and higher education institutions (HEIs) (particularly via the MEYS which distributes the funds). Due to its particular status, ASCR uses its own internal evaluation methodology for internally redistributing the funds that have been received.

Over the period 2010-2013 the performance of research institutions was systematically evaluated annually, strictly based on quantitative indicators. The results were used by the CRDI as a starting point for allocating funding. However, the Government decided to revise the evaluation methodology, following a Country Specific Recommendation from 2012 and criticism by stakeholders and by the independent international audit of the Czech R&D&I system (Arnold, E. 2011).   

The National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 reaffirms that a revised methodology is expected to be available for 2016, while the Country Specific Recommendation 2014 calls for accelerating the development of a methodology that would increase the share of performance-based funding of research institutions. This new methodology is expected to take into account the status and role of beneficiaries, be based on international peer review and place emphasis on excellence in the international context and cooperation with industry. The 2014 NRP also mentions the methodology for the transitional period 2013-2015, which has been prepared based on a combination of new evaluation criteria (such as peer review of books and, for applied research, funds attracted from businesses and acquired through competitive funding) and peer review. The evaluation of research uses a five-year rolling average. The results of the first evaluation using this revised methodology are expected in time to be used for the 2015 R&D budget while the CRDI has the authority to recommend that the Government increases budget lines of particular providers. Still, the transitional methodology referred to above is seen as a short-term solution and a more comprehensive methodology as foreseen by the National Reform Programme 2014 is needed. This complex solution should include right incentives to public researchers to strive for excellence, address societal challenges and cooperate with the business sector.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 45.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is higher than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

As part of the revision of the 2009-2015 National R&D&I policy performed in 2013, the set of national priorities for R&D&I was revised to better target the six major grand challenges identified (competitive knowledge economy, sustainable energy and material resources, environment for quality life, social and cultural challenges, healthy people and secure societies). Those priorities are largely in line with the grand challenges of the Horizon 2020 proposal. International cooperation is encouraged and emphasised in particularly in these areas.       

MEYS is responsible for the international R&D cooperation. International cooperation activities are supported through separate budgetary lines (worth approximately CZK 2 billion). The Interdepartmental Policy of International Cooperation in R&D (2008-2015) should help address international cooperation together with other ministries through cross-sectional R&D programmes, improve the participation of Czech researchers in international research programmes, increase effectiveness of R&D cooperation based on bilateral intergovernmental agreements and unify the administration of present programmes of international cooperation in R&D.     

The 2014 NRP states that the Government will develop a Strategy of Internationalisation of Higher Education, R&D&I and Business by the end of the year. This strategy, which will include, among others, a long-term strategy for membership of the Czech Republic in international research organisations, supports the participation of the Czech entities in Horizon 2020, the principles of involving the Czech Republic in international R&D&I initiatives and programmes implemented within the ERA and the objectives for developing international cooperation in R&D&I with countries outside the EU.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Czech Republic allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in CZ dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

The cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation from the Czech Republic in total participation is 1.2 % and the country received 0.7 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 23 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.1 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (latest available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in five of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life and Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health.          

There are programmes at national level which support research on topics relevant to the Strategic Research Agendas (SRAs). Funding of common actions and alignment of national programmes to the SRAs are under development.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes: EUROSTARS and EMRP. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 28 ERA-NETs, four of which are currently still running. The country also has participated in one ERA-NET Plus action in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

The Czech Republic has concluded about 70 inter-governmental bilateral R&D cooperation agreements, but only some of them are implemented in the way of joint R&D projects funding: with the United States, Russia, China, South Korea, Japan, Argentina, France, Austria, Germany, Israel, Poland and Norway (The Norwegian Financial Mechanism) in the frame of which it recognises evaluations made by partner countries.     

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises of science and technology cooperations across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched, for example a cluster in energy and sustainability research.           

The Visegrad fund (between the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and the Slovak Republic) also provides research grants from a common pot contribution of all countries involved.    

The 2014 NRP states that the Czech Republic is going to put in place a National Space Agency, being the space R&D coordination body, and update the National Space Plan, which focuses its attention particularly, but not exclusively, on cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA).

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries, the Czech Republic has many  inter-governmental bilateral agreements, including with the United States of America, Russia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Argentina and Chile. Regular funding is attributed through the GACR bilateral grants (based on agreements with the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, National Science Foundation of Korea and National Science Council of Taiwan) and TACR budget (newly launched DELTA programme). However, the majority of funds for bilateral cooperation are provided through the MEYS via the KONTAKT II programme, which focuses on the implementation of non-EU intergovernmental agreements.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Czech Republic allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of organisations' R&D budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards is supported in the frame of the bilateral agreements under a mechanism close to the 'lead agency' procedure. However the Money-follows cooperation or Money-follows researchers scheme are not supported by funders.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 57.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in the Czech Republic allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The Czech Republic participates in the following large international research organisations, particularly: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), The Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Southern Observatory (ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and Pierre Auger Observatory. In 2012, the country contributed 0.8 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat). In early 2014, the Czech Republic became a MS of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL).

In terms of participation in the development of Research Infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of nine of them (18 %).

With regards to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, the Czech Republic is involved in six of the nine projects. The country is a member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, EATRIS ERIC, ESS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and CERIC-ERIC, and committed to fund all six. Moreover, all six large European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) funded centres (ELI, IT4I, BIOCEV, CEITEC, SUSEN and FNUSA-ICRC) participate in ESFRI projects.

A proposed draft amendment (March 2013) of the principal law governing research and development (Act No.130/2002 Coll.) should provide institutional funding to support of international cooperation in research on the basis of international evaluation (in order to conform to the Council Regulation 2009/723/EC from 25 June 2009 on ERIC).

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures (Ris), the Czech Republic includes RIs among the policy priorities. The Roadmap of Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures in the Czech Republic was approved in 2010 and it was updated in 2011. Another update is planned for 2014/2015 on the basis of the new methodology for Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures evaluation, which will be prepared by mid-2014. The roadmap includes references to the participation of the Czech Republic in the development of the RIs mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. There is a multiannual budget for funding Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures in the Czech Republic with annual appropriations of approximately CZK 800 million (i.e. EUR 30 million).

In order to ensure the long-term sustainability of the 'European Centres of Excellence' (six R&D centres being built in 2007–2015 using ERDF with the investment costs over EUR 50 million each), the first National Sustainability Programme II call is going to be launched in 2014. Up to 60 % of operating costs of the 'European Centres of Excellence' are to be covered by public funds, while at least 30 % of operational costs shall be covered by international (foreign) or private funds. The total expenditures of the National Sustainability Programme II (2016–2020) are expected at the level of EUR 500 million, including EUR 250 million of contribution from the public funds of the Czech Republic.

With the intention of guaranteeing long-term sustainability of 42 regional R&D centres and 32 R&D centres in Prague (being built by using ERDF in 2007–2015 with investment costs up to EUR 50 million each), the National Sustainability Programme I continues to be implemented. The total expenditures spent in the programme (2013–2020) will reach EUR 700 million, including EUR 350 million of contribution from the Czech Republic public funds.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by the Czech Republic, the access to two of them was funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for the Czech Republic in the Researchers Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Czech Republic_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 30 682 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the Czech Republic in 2011. This represents 5.9 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 22.8 in the Czech Republic compared to 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

In the Czech Republic, each institution is an autonomous employer with its own personnel and recruitment policies. There is no statutory instrument that would allow breaches of the autonomy of the institution. There is no legislation dealing with the online publication of publicly-funded research jobs. EURAXESS Czech Republic operates the Czech National EURAXESS Jobs portal that is linked to the pan-European EURAXESS Jobs portal. This tool is used increasingly by Czech public research organisations/institutes and universities.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

In 2009, the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (ASCR) declared its interest in the 'Human Resources Strategy for Researchers incorporating the Charter and the Code' and included some of the principles to their career system The ASCR also joined the Charles University’s Charter & Code Promoter´s Network’ project (2010) that focuses on raising awareness of the Charter & Code in the research community. As of 2012, the ASCR and the Central European Institute of Technology (CEITEC) were the only research organisations that had signed the Charter and Code in 2006 and 2012 respectively. The Charter & Code are actively promoted by the coordinator of the EURAXESS Network in the Czech Republic at different events organised for researchers as well as for research organisations

By May 2014, one Czech organisation was actively engaged in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers.

There is no policy at Government level in the Czech Republic to offer clear career prospects to researchers. However, an increasing number of institutions, especially natural science institutes of the ASCR, require graduated doctoral students to leave the institution for a postdoctoral fellowship elsewhere.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per 1 000 population aged between 25 and 34 was 1.5 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

Attracting young talented students to become researchers has been embedded in the International Competitiveness Strategy, the National Innovation Strategy and the Human Resources Development in R&D documents developed by the Government of the Czech Republic. All three documents suggest the development of tools and strategies to inspire young people to become researchers. In 2013, there were 24,755 doctoral students at higher education institutes (HEIs) in the Czech Republic, compared to 24 803 in 2012 and 16 491 in 2001. Active doctoral studies in sciences (including mathematics, technology and engineering) accounted for 49.8 % of all doctoral studies in 2013. If medical, pharmaceutical, and life sciences are included the proportion rises to 65.2 %. The percentages have remained relatively stable for the past five years.

The Czech Government has not put in place any measures to increase the number of students taking science to a doctoral level. Moreover, national statistical data and recent reports from the Institute for Information on Education (ÚIV) and the Research, Development and Innovation Council state that - one third of doctoral graduates in the Czech Republic go into a science and technology career. The Czech Government, along with grammar schools, universities and research institutions, is working towards creating or supporting (existing) tools to attract students to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects. In addition, several universities as well as the National Contact Centre for Women and Science at the Institute of Sociology of the ASCR have introduced mentoring programmes to attract women students at secondary education level to follow STEM subjects at university level.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 9 % in the Czech Republic compared to 4.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 4.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 4.1% in the Czech Republic compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The Návrat (Return) programme (2012-2019), funded by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports targets researcher reintegration. It creates conditions for a faster and more successful reintegration of professionals with significant experience in research organisations within the Czech Republic. Since 2012, five-year reintegration grants have been provided. The first call was regionally limited and focused on the region of the capital city because of the complementarity with some particular calls under the operational programmes. Since 2013, three-year reintegration grants have started without any regional limitation. The shorter period was set due to better flexibility, complementarity with other measures and the existed limitations of the R&D national budget.

Another measure is the Purkyne Fellowship, which is awarded by the ASCR and aims to attract ‘leading’ researchers from abroad (mostly Czechs who have spent a period abroad). In the Czech Republic, the level of awareness of the scientific visa for scientists/researchers from third countries has improved thanks to the EURAXESS Network in the Czech Republic. Most researchers from third countries are now well informed about the scientific visa via the EURAXESS centres located at universities and other research organisations in the Czech Republic. The Czech embassies are also well aware of the scientific visa procedures, and thus more and more scientists are being advised to apply for this type of permit.

The Czech Government (the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic) along with universities, research institutions and industrial partners are working towards creating support for existing tools to boost the collaboration between academia and industry. For instance, the Czech Government is currently implementing an ‘Effective Knowledge Transfer’ project. This is one of several individual national projects under the Education for Competitiveness Operational Programme. The project covers systems for intellectual property protection and commercial use, commercialisation of R&D results, and cooperation with industry. The project also involves the development of support methodologies for the implementation, the creation of networks for effective knowledge transfer, and the training of the target group of users in methodological materials. The issue of encouraging researchers to move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa has been embedded in the Czech National Innovation Strategy and is being implemented by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic. Despite recent efforts to develop new collaborative programmes, cooperation between academia and industry is still underdeveloped in the Czech Republic.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The recruitment, retention and career progression of researchers is regulated by the general labour market legislation on non-discrimination and equal opportunities (the Act No. 262/2006, Coll. on labour code, the Act No. 435/2004 Coll. on employment and the Act No. 198/2009, Coll. on antidiscrimination). Labour law guarantees a maternity leave of six months with return to the same position (not for fixed-term contracts) and parental leave up to three years. The Government proceedings (or law) require that gender impact is assessed for every Government resolution.

The Governmental Resolution No. 1033 of 2001 establishes measures on equal opportunities. The most important body concerning equal opportunities is the Governmental Council for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, which started its activity at the end of 2002 as an advisory body of the Government. Also created in 2001, the National Contact Centre for Women and Science ('Zeny a veda') is the main agent shaping gender policy in R&D in the Czech Republic. It carries out analysis and raises awareness about gender issues.

A strategy on gender equality in public research, in line with the ERA Communications objectives, is being prepared by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. No dedicated funds shall directly be allocated to the implementation of this strategy in the field of research and innovation; MEYS only consults Zeny a veda every year on priority actions to be carried out.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 57.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The Czech Republic has set up some awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically support female researchers. The award Milada Paulová is jointly organised by MEYS and Zeny a veda for lifelong achievement of female researchers in Czech science. The L’ORÉAL Scholarship Czech Republic for Women in Science is also in place.

At the funders’ level, the GACR allows, with some restrictions, female researchers to interrupt or postpone research activities due to maternity leave. In 2013, an independent audit was carried out to assess gender equality in the operation of GACR, but the results have not publicly been released yet.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 22.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

So far, it seems that no provisions exist to tackle the gender dimension in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 35 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

The Czech Republic has not set up any targets for the participation of women in decision-making bodies of Research Performing Organisations. However, the ASCR has constantly increased the share of women in higher management positions. Thus, the representation of women in its Academic Council is now about 25 %. The ASCR has established the National Contact Centre for Gender & Science of which it is also supportive.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 19.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in CZ is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the CRDI administers the R&D&I information system of the Czech Republic, which provides open access to information about publicly-funded research activities, projects and their outputs. It allows the collection, processing, publication and utilisation of data. The Czech Statistical Office (CZSO), pursuant to the Section 17 'Provision of confidential statistical data' of the Act No. 89/1995, on the State Statistical Service, provides confidential statistical data for scientific research purposes. Several open access repositories are run by different stakeholders.

Related to open access to publications or data, there are no specific obligatory measures in place at national level. However, in February 2014, the CRDI approved its document titled 'Open Access to published research results financed by public budget'  (CRDI OA Document) which mainly presents three types of recommendations:

1°) Recommendation for respective public administration bodies to tackle open access issue and prepare national strategy on open access,

2°) Recommendation for research organisations to deal with open access at institutional level in terms of supporting repositories and adopting internal guidelines on open access,

3°) Recommendation for R&D&I grants providers to include requirement to promote open access to scientific publications into their R&D&I programs. The stakeholders targeted by the CRDI OA Document are expected to start acting in line with the recommendations as soon as possible unless they have already done so. For example, a number of Czech universities as well as the ASCR have an open access policy in place and have their institutional repositories for depositing research publications. The Association of Libraries of Czech Universities also provides institutional support to open access.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, there seems to be limited support.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 13.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, a few research organisations have created their own repositories.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private sectors, the Czech Republic’s National Innovation Strategy (NIS), published in October 2011 and coproduced by MIT and MEYS, lists 'Cooperation and knowledge transfer between academia and industry' as one of the four priority areas. Additionally, the National Research, Development and Innovation Policy also promotes better research links between academia and industry. The newly implemented R&D programmes, mostly funded by TACR but also by MEYS and MIT, support public-private R&D co-operation (ALFA, Centres of Competence, etc.) With the same overall objective, two new governmental programmes have recently been put in place: EPSILON, supporting applied research and experimental development for industry and GAMA to support a more efficient transfer and commercial exploitation of R&D&I results. The state-of-the-art intellectual property rights (IPR) legislation is in place and the NRP 2014 mentions that the Government will support its application. These efforts are being largely supported by EU funds allocated to R&D, which reached 0.3 % of GDP in 2012 and have become one of the main sources of R&D funding in the Czech Republic. As a result, the level of public funding injected into the national innovation system is currently quite high by EU standards (in 2012, the sum of national and EU funding of R&D amounted to 1.01 % of GDP) and business expenditure on R&D is gradually catching up. However, these initiatives and efforts are not yet translating into a visible improvement of the quality and relevance of scientific output which would support the emergence and development of more domestic innovation leaders. This weak performance is attributed to misaligned incentives embodied in the current approach to evaluating public research and allocating funding. The complexity of Czech research and innovation policy may also play a role.

In December 2012, the Government already approved an action plan to promote growth, entrepreneurship and employment, which one of the proposed measures is to extend the existing R&D tax credits to purchase external R&D services from research organisations.    This is a step towards fostering cooperation between academia and the business sector. Research performing organisations are also assessed on their ability to attract industry funding (see section on Effectiveness). Beginning with 2012, the setting-up of Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) at universities or intermediary organisations is supported via the Structural Funds. Strategic partnerships between academia and industry are supported by TACR via the Centres of Competence programme. Additionally, provisions are in place to support public-private partnerships (PPPs) via Structural Funds.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 40.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 30.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Czech Republic who responded to the survey and support national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of the Digital ERA, in March 2013, the Czech Republic approved the State Policy in Electronic Communications Digital Czech Republic v. 2.0 - The Way to the Digital Economy. In 2010, with the approval of CESNET (initially established in 1996 as a joint venture of universities and the ASCR) the Czech Republic has implemented a research and education network (NREN) essential to make digital services possible. CESNET is also the coordinator of the National Grid Infrastructure (NGI) and a member of EGI.eu.   

Other e-infrastructures of relevance are: eIGeR – e-Infrastructure and Grids for e-Regions; IT4Innovations – building a national High Performance Computing Centre of Excellence in the field of information and communication technologies, NTIS (New Technologies for Information Society) and the CERIT Scientific Cloud.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 46.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 31.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

The Czech Republic was a member of an identity federation in 2011 via CESNET providing inter-organisational identity management and interconnectivity of networks. Also via CESNET, the country is a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GEANT (GN3plus) partners federations. Among the projects run by CESNET, the EDUROAM infrastructure and eduroam.cz project support and spread Internet Protocol (IP) mobility and roaming in order to enable users of interconnected networks an easy and transparent usage of any network connected to the roaming space. The Czech Academic Identity Federation eduID.cz project provides means for inter-organisational identity management and access control to network services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 37.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Czech Republic, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 24 research performing organisations in Czech Republic answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 8.0% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Czech Republic shows that 34.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 39.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 26.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 46.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 43.8 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 9.3 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National Research, Development and Innovation Policy of the Czech Republic 2009-2015 with a view to 2020. National priorities of oriented research, experimental development and innovations || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Act No. 211/2009 Coll, amending Act No.130/2002 Coll. on the support for research and development from public funds || 2009 || ||

Council for Research, Development and Innovation (CRDI) || 2009 || ||

TCAR programmes for applied research and development ALFA, BETA, GAMA, DELTA, OMEGA programmes, Competence Centres || 2013 || X || X

Other programmes providing competitive funding TIP programme || 2008 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

New methodology to allocate institutional funding || 2013 || X || X

GACR Postdoc grants || 1998 || ||

Revision of the formula for allocation of institutional funding for 2013-2015 || 2012 || X ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Participation in EIROs || || ||

Joint Programming Initiatives, ERA-NETS and ERA-NETS plus || 2009 || ||

Participation in Joint Technology Initiatives || 2007 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

GACR and TACR programmes || || ||

The Visegrad Fund || 2000 || ||

International bilateral agreements || 2006 || ||

National Information Centre for European Research (NICER) Czech Liaison Office for Research and Development in Brussels (CZELO) || 2005 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Update of the Roadmap for Large Research, Development and Innovation Infrastructures || 2011 || ||

Draft version of the Amendment of the Act No. 130/2002 Coll. On the support for research and development from public funds || 2013 || X || X

Large Research Infrastructures linked with ESFRI || 2010 || ||

National Sustainability Programmes I and II || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Project „EURAXESS Czech Republic 2012 - 2015“ || 2012 || X ||

Attractive careers

Scientific Visa Package - transposed through Act No. 379/2007 || || ||

The Higher Education Act (Act No. 111/1998 Coll.) || 1998 || ||

Reform of Tertiary Education programme || 2013 || X || X

The Common Rules for Human Resources Management of CEITEC Code of Ethics for Researchers of the ASCR || 2011 || ||

International and inter-sectoral mobility

MOBILITY programme || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Act No. 262/2006, Coll. on labour code Act No. 435/2004 Coll. On employment Act No. 198/2009, Coll. On antidiscrimination General provisions in the NRP 2013 || || ||

Milada Paulova Award || 2009 || ||

Governmental Resolution No. 1033 of 2001 || 2010 || ||

Government proceedings ("Jednací řád vlády") || 1998 || ||

ERA Working Group on Human Resources Development and Equal Approach to Women and Men in Research, Development and Innovation. || 2001 || ||

Ministerial gender focal points Working Groups for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men || 2001 || ||

National Contact Centre for Women and Science || 2001 || ||

L’ORÉAL Scholarship Czech Republic for Women in Science || 2007 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Research Data Repositories || || ||

Open access repositories || || ||

Central Register of R&D projects Register of public R&D tenders Information Register of R&D results Central Register of Institutional Research Plans || 1993 || ||

www.openaccess.cz www.dspace.cz || 2010 || ||

Statistical Data for Scientific Research Purposes || || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Priority Axis 3 “Commercialisation and popularisation of R&D“ of the OP Research and Development for Innovation || 2006 || ||

Action plan to promote growth, entrepreneurship and employment || 2013 || X || X

National Innovation Strategy of the Czech Republic || 2011 || ||

ALFA Programme Centres of competence DELTA programme EF-TRANS TIP programme || 2009 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Czech Education and Scientific NETwork (CESNET) || 2010 || ||

IT4Innovations || 2010 || ||

CERIT Scientific Cloud || 2010 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Czech academic identity federation (eduID.cz) - member of eduGAIN || 2009 || ||

Project eduroam.cz || 2004 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

In Germany, the central responsibility for research, technology and innovation policy lies with two ministries: the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) is mainly responsible for public research, while the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) focuses on funding innovation and research in the business sector. In addition, other Federal Ministries provide funding for research in their respective spheres of competence, particularly the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL), the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG), the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure (BMVI) and the Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB).         

The 16 Länder also provide funding for research and innovation (R&I) under their own programmes. Regional research and innovation policy is to some extent based on the Federal Government's research funding priorities but also follows regional funding agendas. The Länder are responsible for higher education legislation and for financing institutions of higher education.        

The Joint Science Conference (GWK) is the main body that coordinates research policies between the Federal Government and Länder (State) governments.         

The German Science Council (sometimes called the German Council of Science and Humanities - WR) advises the Federal Government and the Länder on questions related to universities, science and research both content-wise and from the structural development point of view.        

The German Research Foundation (DFG), the German Rectors' Conference (HRK), the Helmholtz Association (HGF), Fraunhofer (FhG), the Max Planck Society (MPG), the Leibniz Association (WGL), the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH), the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), the German National Acedemy of Sciences (Leopoldina) and the German Council of Science and Humanities (WR) have organised themselves in the Alliance of Science Organisations in Germany.        

The Federal Government and the Länder jointly support the DFG as well as other non-university research institutions: HGF, MPG, FhG,WGL the National Academy of Science and Engineering (acatech), and Leopoldina. Other non-university research institutions comprise of the departmental research institutions of the Federal Government and the Länder, which also receive their basic funding largely from the public sector.           

DAAD, which is mainly financed by the Federal Government, supports international exchanges of students, graduates and researchers. Public and private foundations also provide funding for research, for example the Volkswagen Foundation, AvH, the German Environment Foundation (DBU), the German Foundation for Peace Research (DSF), and the twelve organisations for the promotion of young talent in higher education.      

The institutions of higher education comprise of government-funded and private universities, universities of applied sciences and other academic institutions, which all combine both academic teaching and research.

The High-Tech Strategy 2020 of the Federal Government defines the central goals of Germany's research and innovation policy. It is a follow-up of the previous High-Tech Strategy of 2006 and was developed to concentrate the public research and development (R&D) resources and improve coordination between all affected ministries. The aim is to create lead markets in Germany, to intensify cooperation between science and industry, and to further improve the framework conditions for innovation. The overall goal of the High-Tech Strategy 2020 is to make Germany a pioneering force in solving global challenges. In this respect, the strategy addresses five key priority areas (demand fields) of research that are linked to global challenges: climate and energy,  health and nutrition, mobility, security and communication. 

In its National Reform Programme 2014, Germany states that the High-Tech Strategy as the Innovation Strategy for Germany will be further developed by the Summer of 2014. It should reinforce the focus on challenges such as sustainable development and digitalisation.

Additionally, the Strategy of the Federal Government on the European Research Area (ERA), as already anounced by the 2014 National Reform Programme, has been published at July 18th. It focuses on researchers’ mobility, joint programming, research infrastructures, knowledge transfer, gender equality and international cooperation.

Germany has a Country Specific Recommendation: 'Use the available scope for increased and more efficient public investment in infrastructure, education and research'.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Germany represented EUR 294 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant increased, to reach EUR 306. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 2 % of total government expenditures and 0.9 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Germany has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Germany, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison, in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Germany even when it regressed at EU-28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

R&D programmes by ministries (e.g. 'Initiative of Excellence', R&D thematic programmes by BMBF; etc) are administered and managed by a range of implementation agencies (Projektträger, seven at the moment), which are mostly located in large research centres. These programmes provide project funding on a competitive basis, according to the 'Pakt für Forschung und Innovation'.         

Most R&D programmes support cooperation between public (or private) research institutions, higher education institutions (HEI) and companies.

The central task of the DFG is to award funding for basic research to universities as well as research organisations' cooperating with them in projects via a competitive procedure. DFG provides one of the main sources of competitive funding through its funding programmes collaborative research centres, research centres, research training groups, priority programmes and research units, both in quantitative as well as in qualitative terms.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 56.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

Competitive, peer review-based allocation of funds is the main procedure applied at DFG and is embedded in its statute. International peer-review principles like excellence, objectivity, transparency, confidentiality and ethics of science are applied. In 2012, 26 % of DFG expert opinions were prepared by experts from abroad. R&D programmes not managed by the DFG normally also require the establishment of an evaluation committee.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

The Federal Government and the Länder concluded a Pact for Research and Innovation (also called the Joint Initiative for Research and Innovation) with the science and research organisations (DFG, FhG, HGF, WGL and MPG) in 2005. The Pact was renewed in 2009 to cover the period up to 2015. One of the objectives of this joint initiative is to launch suitable measures to ensure and optimise the quality, efficiency and performance of science and research institutions that receive institutional funding. Large non-university research institutions (HGF, FhG, MPG and WGL) allocate a share of their institutional funds on competitive basis, based on processes that include peer review. According to the Pact for Research and Innovation, these instruments should be developed further on a continuous basis.        

90 % of the funding for universities is provided by public sources, 80 % by the Länder and 10 % by the Federal Government. 10 % are private funds. The governments of the Länder are responsible for financing research and teaching at public universities in their respective state. Co-funding of universities by the Federal Government is restricted to financing the construction of research infrastructure and some specific programmes (for example 'Excellence Initiative', Higher Education Pact, Programme for Women Professors).           

Institutional funding to individual HEIs is partly allocated on a competitive basis. Within HEIs, a certain share of salaries might be allocated on a competitive basis with criteria defined and thus variable by State (Land) and university.

Evaluations of public research institutions are carried out on a more or less regular basis, for example by the WR. Depending on the outcome and recommendations made in light of such evaluations, budgets provided by the Federal Government or the Länder might be adjusted structurally (share of institutional to total funding), in terms of total budget provisions (volume change, contribution of Federal/State Government), up to the closure or reorganisation of the corresponding institutes.          

The evaluation of the German science system has also become increasingly international since 2008. International science is represented on the permanent advisory boards of the institutes of research organisations as well as on the commissions for institutional and programme evaluation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 42.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is higher than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

The 2008 Strategy of the Federal Government for the Internationalisation of Science and Research 'Strengthening Germany’s role in the Global Knowledge Society' has four designated priority fields that form the central theme of the international activities of German science and research: strengthen cooperation with the world’s best, developing innovation potential at an international level, strengthening the cooperation with developing countries in education and research in the long term, assuming international responsibility and coping with global challenges. Its objectives are well interwoven with the High-Tech Strategy, the Pact for Research and Innovation and the Initiative for Excellence. The strategy sets a general target of 20 % of the participation rate of foreign partners for BMBF programmes, but the degree of openness is programme specific.

The general importance of international cooperation, especially with regards to solving the 'grand challenges' has been highlighted and reinforced in the High-Tech Strategy 2020, which is intended to help Germany assume a leading role in the solution of global challenges.       

The (revised) Pact for Research and Innovation calls upon research organisations to continuously review and develop their internationalisation strategies in terms of their contribution to increasing institutional performance. The organisations establish and expand research collaborations on important topics with excellent international partners and strategic countries, gain access to research objects including those abroad and open up their own research infrastructures to foreign researchers, become involved in global knowledge flows and play an active part in shaping the ERA. Science organisations described major aspects of these activities in their 2011 Pact Monitoring Report and presented a joint position paper on internationalisation.        

The major players enabling international research collaboration, which provide by far largest share of respective resources, are the BMBF and the DFG. The framework for international research collaboration is set by the BMBF’s 2008 'Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the preparation and implementation of transnational calls for proposals' (Leitfaden des BMBF zur transnationalen Zusammenarbeit).

The National Reform Programme 2014 highlights cooperation within Joint Programming Initiatives and International Cooperation as two of the fields to be included in the forthcoming National ERA Strategy.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Germany allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Germany dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Germany in total participation is 15.4 % and the country received 18.7 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 82.7 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in nine of the ten ongoing initiatives, coordinating two of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (MS) (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 126 ERA-NETs, of which 37 are currently still running. The country also has participated in 15 ERA-NET Plus actions, of which ten are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Germany has at least 23 bilateral agreements [notably with Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Czech Repubic, Denmark, Greece, Spain, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Moldova, The Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Slovakia, Turkey, United Kingdom] and three multilateral agreements[notably with Austria and Switzerland under D-A-C-H, France, The Netherlands, United Kingdom plus the United States beginning with 2013 under Open Research Area (ORA) plus, the Open Initiative of ERA-Chemistry with 12 countries participating] either at BMBF or DGF level in order to launch and/or further intensify cooperation in research and education, thus removing barriers and/or explicitly permitting joint financing of projects and programmes.

A good example for BMBF cooperation with MS is the French-German Agenda 2020: the bilateral work programme (adopted in 2010) lists more than 80 joint projects in various political spheres, including in education, research and innovation. Some specific research fields (for example energy and social sciences) have been identified for further collaboration. Furthermore BMBF and the respective French Ministry organise French-German-Research-Fora every three years aimed at opening up new fields of bilateral cooperation.

DFG has a broad range of international funding programmes such as the German-Israeli Project Cooperation or the ORA plus for the Social Sciences).   

One example in a range of initiatives carried out by the German Länder is the Upper Rhine Tri-national Metropolitan Region (German Länder of Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate and the French Alsace region) science programme set up in 2011 to facilitate the implementation of flagship projects in the Upper Rhine area through INTERREG applications in the research and innovation sector.

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 14 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). Germany promotes the cooperation between the countries in the Danube Region by discussing the potential of multilateral research development and innovation (RDI) funding. It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched, for example a cluster in energy and sustainability research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, the country has developed a specific policy. The political basis are usually bilateral science and technology (S&T) agreements. The BMBF is managing about 40 of these bilateral S&T agreements. In addition, a number of research organisations implemented specific agreements with partner institutions on a thematic level.  Their purpose is to launch and/or further intensify cooperation in science and technology, thus removing barriers for and/or explicitly permitting joint financing of projects and programmes. The priorities for international cooperation are laid down in the strategy of the Federal Government for the internationalisation of research and science, published in 2008. The current government plans to further develop this strategy, leading to a revised strategy to be published in 2015. The G8 Research Councils Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding medium-term was established under the initiative of the DFG in 2010. The goal is to establish a large pool of multilateral projects that can be supported by the national programmes of the German Research Foundation (DFG) and its partner organisations at any time.

The international dimension is an inherent part of the national R&I system and plays an important role in the realisation of the ERA. It encompasses all activities the European institutions and MS jointly conduct on the international floor and with Third Countries. The coalition agreement of the federal election 2013 stated that the German Government will take responsibility for the completion of the ERA and consequently implement its ERA strategy on a national and European level. This also implies for the Federal Government to enhance its S&T cooperation with Third Countries as integral part of its national ERA strategy. In order to actively shape and strengthen the international dimension, Germany uses the whole European governance structure on a national and European level and takes its role seriously.

One activity stemming from the Competitiveness Council Conclusions of May 2013 invites the MS via the Scientific Forum for International Cooperation (SFIC) to support the European Commission in developing the multi-annual roadmaps, which define common European goals for future international S&T cooperation. Germany followed this request in 2013 and for the coming years supports the SFIC recommendations to develop a structured process for the consultation and implementation of these roadmaps. 

Germany is very actively involved in SFIC and is the lead MS for the United States and the Russia pilot initiatives as well as a member of all working groups. Germany is also an active participant in different Senior Official configurations, aimed at implementing joint bi-regional activities, i.e. EU-CELAC, INDIA GSO, EU-ASEAN, EU-WBC, EU-AU, EU-EaP, EU-MoCo.   

The international dimension is an inherent part of the national R&I-system and plays an important role in the realization of the ERA. It encompasses all activities the European institutions and Member States jointly conduct on the international floor and with third countries. In the coalition agreement of the federal election 2013 it is stated that the German government will take responsibility for the completion of the ERA and consequently implement its ERA-strategy on national and European level. This also implies for the federal government to enhance its S&T cooperation with third countries as integral part of its national ERA-strategy. In order to actively shape and strengthen the international dimension, Germany uses the whole European governance structure on national and European level and takes its role seriously:

One activity stemming from the Competitiveness Council Conclusions of May 2013 invites the Member States via the Scientific Forum for International Cooperation (SFIC) to support the European Commission in developing the multi annual roadmaps, which define common European goals for future international S&T cooperation Germany followed this request 2013 and for the coming years supports the SFIC-recommendation to develop a structured process for consultation and implementation of these roadmaps. 

Germany is very actively involved in SFIC and is the lead Member State for the USA and the Russia pilot initiatives as well as member of all working groups. Germany is also an active participant in different Senior Official configurations, aiming at implementing joint bi-regional activities, i.e. EU-CELAC, INDIA GSO, EU-ASEAN, EU-WBC, EU-AU, EU-EaP, EU-MoCo.   

Germany follows the approach to emphasize international cooperation within the Horizon 2020 governance structure via the horizontal configuration and the challenge 6 configuration of the programme committee.

In the field of international cooperation within FP7 Germany is one of the most active EU-countries. German institutions successfully cooperate with 158 countries (out of 176) in FP7 projects.  In 2.078 projects third countries participated (status February 2014). In 313 of these projects Germany acted as coordinator and in this function received almost EUR 255 million from the European Commission.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Germany allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from Third Countries is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported by the Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the preparation and implementation of transnational calls for proposals. The central goal of the guidelines is to provide the programme owners and administrators with a basis for implementatiing transnational calls for proposals within existing funding schemes, based on best practice and experience gained in bilateral and joint ERA-Net calls. However, the selection process as well as eligibility and assessment criteria have to be set in each joint programme by the participating partners according to the program specification.  

When transnational project funding initiatives (e.g. ERA-NETs, Art. 185 measures) include joint evaluation procedures, the scientific and technical results of such evaluations are as a rule be recognised in Germany.

The D-A-CH is a multilateral agreement between the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). These agencies have agreed to apply the so called 'lead agency' procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries (for research projects with participants of at least two of the three countries). It also allows researchers to move to one of those countries following a money-follows-cooperation-line scheme, a scheme that allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. DFG has no specific budget for projects that are submitted and selected on the lead agency process. These projects compete with purely national projects.         

DFG applies the lead agency processes also in cooperation with Luxembourg. In the G8 Research Councils Initiative on Multilateral Research and the ORA/ORA plus, proposals go through a joint respectively coordinated evaluation process by the participating funding organisations. Funding is generally allocated according to the funding rules of each individual agency. Besides, there are joint calls and evaluations by research performing organisations (RPOs) with foreign partners, e.g. Programme Inter Carnot Fraunhofer, Helmholtz-Russia or Helmholtz-CAS Joint Research Groups, Helmholtz International Research Groups.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Germany allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Germany participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RI): European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), European Synchotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), European XFEL and Institut Laue-Langebin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.1% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 39 of them (79 %). The country coordinates ten of them: SHARE-ERIC, IAGOS, EU-OPENSCREEN, EuroBioImaging, ERINHA, INFRAFRONTIER, MIRRI, XFEL, CTA and FAIR.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these RIs, Germany is committed to fund 18 of them. They are: CESSDA, CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, ESSurvey , SHARE-ERIC, EURO ARGO, IAGOS, ICOS, BBMRI, ECRIN, EU-OPENSCREEN, INFRAFRONTIER, E-ELT, ESSneutrons, XFEL, CTA, ELI, FAIR.

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Germany is involved in six of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries. Germany is hosting SHARE-ERIC, is a member of CLARIN ERIC, of the ESS ERIC, of BBMRI-ERIC, of EURO-ARGO ERIC, and of ECRIN-ERIC. The legal basis for implementing a ERIC was adopted in Germany on 7 June 2013.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of RIs, Germany's Partnership Agreement (PA) with the EU provides for the possibility of spending Structural Funds on ESFRI projects between 2014 and 2020. The Federal Government called upon the Länder to include ESFRI projects in their operational programmes (OP)at Länder level.

Additionally, according to the 2014 National Reform Programme, the forthcoming National ERA Strategy will include among the priorities Research Infrastructures.          

The National Roadmap on Research Infrastructures was published in 2013. It is the first German overview of priority RI projects that the BMBF is planning to realise in the coming 10-15 years. The launch of the Roadmap was meant to support and guide political decisions in terms of research infrastructures (i.e. for instance large scale research infrastructures of national/European importance, comprehensive experiments, etc.). The roadmap includes references to the participation of Germany in the development of the Ris mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap (see above). Inclusion in the Roadmap is paramount to a German financial commitment to the project in question. Some expenditure is presented on a yearly basis and some as global amounts. Timeframes for funding depend on individual ESFRI projects. Priorities outside of ESFRI are for example: research vessels, within the research vessel strategy (Forschungsschiff-Strategie), the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing (which, in turn, contributes to PRACE), or, W 7-X. An update of the Roadmap is planned so that further projects can be added, including areas for which other government departments are responsible (health, environment, energy).

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to RIs, the 'Research in Germany' portal provides an overview of research and research funding opportunities in Germany, including RI. Access to RI is commonly possible for any researcher working at the corresponding Public Reserach Organisations (PROs) (which is operating the RI) or at another research centre which has a corresponding collaboration agreement, i.e. it is neither generally limited to researchers of German origin nor to German research organisations.         

The research organisations HGF, MPG, WGL and DFG and the German Council of Science and Humanities contributed to the FP7-funded project 'MERIL, Mapping of the European Research Infrastructure Landscape'. The MERIL database, which is under construction, currently lists 119 national RIs that offer transnational access and are therefore relevant for the ERA.         

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by Germany, access to 65 of them has been funded by the European Commission.

Germany is supporting and taking part in the development of a European Charter of Access, initiated by ESFRI.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Germany in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Germany_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 338 608 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Germany in 2011. This represents 8.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 9.6 in Germany compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 62 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

There is no legal obligation to publish job vacancies on national online platforms, but most organisations do so. The platform www.academics.de/www.academics.com  is a central, fee-charging commercial site for job vacancies in academia. 'Academics' is a joint venture for Germany, Austria and Switzerland of the leading German weekly 'Die Zeit' and the academic journal 'Forschung und Lehre' and achieves high visibility. It also provides additional services. It is important for universities and research institutions to publish their job vacancies on academics.de. Personnel departments at universities then have to consider whether it is worthwhile for them to publish job vacancies on EURAXESS as well.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The German Government supports the objectives of the European Charter & Code.

German universities have begun to engage in the Human Resources (HR) Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) process. In practice, however, the Charter & Code is not used much as a reference. Reasons include a relatively low awareness of the Charter & Code as well as the fact that institutions do not see the need for an additional acknowledgement because the existing regulatory framework and initiatives such as ‘Total E-Quality’ or ‘Audit familiengerechte Hochschule’  cover most areas of the Charter & Code.

By May 2014, nine German organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which one had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The German Government has continuously increased funding for education and research in recent years and aims to raise expenditure in these areas to 10 % of GDP by 2015. Between 2005 and 2012, the Federal Government increased its funding for R&D by 52 % and for education by 70 %. The Länder, which are directly responsible for schools and higher education in Germany, have all maintained or increased their basic funding for public HEIs.

Via the ongoing Helmholtz-Postdoctorate-Programme (HGF), talented young academics may receive a grant for a period of two to three years after earning their PhD, enabling them to work independently on a research topic of their own choice and establish themselves in their field of research. To promote equal opportunities at least 50 % of the positions in the programme are to be granted to women. The programme started in 2012 with the funding of 35 postdoctorates. In 2013 20 postdocs were selected for funding. The funding volume of the Initiative and Networking Fund for this programme is EUR 9 million for the two selection rounds.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 2.8 in 2011 compared with 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In Germany, only universities are legally entitled to grant doctoral degrees. Many universities have recently established so-called Graduate Academies or Research Schools that encompass university-wide structures to train doctoral candidates (sometimes in close cooperation with research organisations), sometimes including offers for MA students and/or post doctorates). They function as one-stop information and support centres for doctoral candidates. They offer and coordinate various programmes for this target group, provide networking possibilities and ensure good standards in training and supervision.

Thirteen Helmholtz graduate schools and 21 Helmholtz research schools were funded since 2006. Their aim is to enhance existing training programmes both quantitatively and qualitatively. Graduate schools are designed to improve the structuring of the doctoral phase and give doctoral students stable supervision conditions and an individually agreed qualification programme consisting of scientific and interdisciplinary elements.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 MS was 5.3 % in Germany compared with 9.1 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 11.2 % in Germany compared with 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

Through the Recruiting Initiative (HGF), the Helmholtz Association has been creating extra positions for top level scientists thanks to budget increases. The initiative aims to recruit from three target groups: outstanding researchers, women scientists and researchers from abroad. The programme will run until 2015 and encompasses 40 extra positions.

The DAAD Postdoctoral Programme supports German researchers who carry out independent research projects at host institutions abroad. Funding is provided for research stays from 3 to 24 months, including a research fellowship, travel allowance, family allowance and a re-integration grant.

Universities, non-university research institutions (particularly Fraunhofer) and the private sector in Germany are closely interlinked, particularly in the field of engineering. For example, students are offered the possibility of pursuing a PhD in applied research in close collaboration with industry. A high level of third-party funding raised by universities from the private sector and the right of university employees to pursue secondary employment are additional indicators of a strong link between business and academic research in Germany. Professors at universities of applied science are generally expected to have at least five years of professional experience, three of them outside the university system. The table below describes measures aimed at encouraging researchers’ inter-sectoral mobility.

The Validation of the Innovation Potential of scientific research (VIP) initiative invites scientists from universities and research institutions to benchmark and substantiate their research results with respect to their economic benefit. An innovation mentor with an industrial background is obligatory for each project. New forms of collaboration are being promoted through the 'Forschungscampus' (research campus) initiative closely linking academia and industry, and the 'Spitzencluster-Wettbewerb' (Leading- Edge Cluster Competition), which is intended to keep Germany in the top league of technologically advanced nations. The high-performance clusters formed by business and science enter into strategic partnerships based on a common cluster strategy in a particular technological area. The 10 'Forschungscampi' and 15 'Spitzencluster' provide young researchers with outstanding opportunities to work at the interface between science and industry in a challenging and innovative environment.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

In Germany, general anti-discrimination laws, including the 2006 General Law on Equal Treatment (Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG)) and Germany's Federal Bodies Law (Bundesgremienbesetzungsgesetz (BGremBG) of June 1994) provide for equal opportunities. In general, ‘equal opportunities’ and thus also the responsibility for ‘equal opportunity commissioners’ in Germany falls into the competence of the federal Ministry for family, senior citizens, Women and youth (BMFSFJ). Which has put in place several initiatives to increase awareness and knowledge of the issue. An annual report on the matter is published by the German Government (Gleichstellungsbericht der Bundesregierung).

The Higher Education Laws of the Länder also provide for equal opportunities at the level of universities. Equal opportunities policy is defined as a task for the institutions' senior management. In addition the Länder have their own programmes to enhance equal opportunities at universities. The Federal Government considers that Länder and institutions should find their own solutions for increasing participation by women and a fixed quota may lead to a situation in which women researchers in areas where they have so far been heavily under-represented have to shoulder a disproportionately greater workload than their male colleagues due to committee duties in addition to research.         

The 2007 Pact for Research and Innovation (PFI) firmly established the requirement that research organisations should develop strategies to ensure that women's research potential is fully used. The target agreements to which the research organisations commited themselves in 2007 were further developed in 2011. The Federal Government and the Länder expect the research organisations to implement the Joint Science Conference (GWK) decision of 2011 on recruitment and career progression of women by establishing flexible target quotas in keeping with the 'cascade model' of the DFG's research-oriented standards on gender equality. The organisations are expected to agree targets at management level to ensure that the quotas are achieved. Four research organisations, HGF, FhG, MPG and WGL developed their own specific procedures for applying the 'cascade model' and established target quotas in 2012. The organisations are expected to implement significant changes in the quantitative representation of women in the research system, particularly in leading positions. The research organisations report on the progress was made as part of the annual monitoring exercise under the Pact.     

The DFG together with its member institutions adopted and committed itself in 2008 to the'Research-oriented standards on gender equality' for a sustainable gender equality policy in research and higher education. The goal is to markedly increase the proportion of women at all scientific career levels. In this frame, the DFG developed a freely accessible toolbox that contains a collection of equal opportunity measures. DFG also supports member institutions in implementating the gender equality standards and assesses their gender equality strategies and their progress in the field.         

The Centre of Excellence Women and Science (CEWS) (part of the Leibnitz Association) is the national hub for realising equal opportunities for women and men in science and research in Germany. The CEWS aims to increase the number of women in leading positions at universities and research institutions and raise the efficiency of political measures aimed at equality. The CEWS aims to introduce gender mainstreaming in all areas of science and research. It maintains the FemConsult database, which contains current profiles of several thousand women academics. With regards to HEI, CEWS rankings of institutions of higher education based on equality aspects, issued every two years, there is an established instrument of equal opportunities quality control within the higher education system.           

Further equal opportunity evaluations are provides by the Total-E-Quality Advisory Service (est. 2001), Family Friendly University Audit (est. 1998) and others.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The country has measures supporting return after parental leave. For example, Section 2 para 5 of the Academic Fixed-Term Contract Law (Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz) of April 2007 provides that fixed-term contracts may be extended for parental leave or equivalent. The Federal and Länder governments have declared providing childcare facilities as a political goal and provided additional funding. Also since 2007, several general measures are in place, for instance, the parental leave programme (Elternzeit) and parental allowance programme (Elterngeld).

The country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in research programmes and/or projects. Improvement of equal opportunities has indeed been included as a central goal of the BMBF large-scale initiatives: the Initiative for Excellence and the Higher Education Pact 2020. The experts evaluating proposals have to consider whether the proposed measures can promote equal opportunities for men and women in research. Since 2008, it has been possible to apply for ring-fenced funds for equal opportunities measures in all collaborative projects of the DFG. This money can be used to support women as project managers, in pursuing their research careers, or making researcher's workplaces more family-friendly.           

The country provides incentives for the recruiting female researchers and to promoting the access of female researchers to senior positions in HEI and other Research Performing Organisations. To increase the participation of women in all levels of academic training the Federal Government and the Länder 2007 initiated the female Professors Programme on the basis of a positive appraisal of their equality policies, Higher education institutions have the opportunity to receive funding for up to three professorships for women. HEIs are participating to a great extent. The percentage of women professors almost doubled between 2002 and 2010 from 8 % to 15 % (She figures 2012). In 2012, the Federal Government and the Länder decided to continue the female Professors Programme and fund a second period. The first and second funding period consisted of EUR150 million each.    

In Germany the National Pact for Women in MINT Careers (comparable to STEM Careers) was launched in June 2008 as part of the Federal Government’s 'Get Ahead through Education' qualifications initiative in order to increase the percentage of women in mathematics, informatics, natural science and technology. Recently 180 partners are taking part from academia, research, industry, politics, associations, labour and management and the media.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

In addition to the female Professors Programme, the BMBF has an important programme dedicated to research into gender equality and the gender dimension in research programmes: Frauen an die Spitze (Women at the Top). Research in this programme is focused on gender equality issues, the causes of gender imbalances in leadership positions as well as gender-specific research and gender innovation in thematic fields (medicine, natural and economic sciences). The projects are expected to test new action schemes in Germany as a basis for new approaches towards increasing equal opportunities. Between 2007 and 2015, 116 projects are ste to be funded. The results of those projects serve to develop new instruments for action that aim to improve gender balance and gender mainstreaming in research and society.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 99.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, one of the BMBF's central tasks is to tackle the under-representation of women in leadership positions. It created an 'Equal Opportunities in Education and Research Division' to deal with this issue.

In 2006, the organisations of the Research Alliance launched a campaign to promote equal opportunities for men and women in research (Offensive für Chancengleichheit von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern) (reviewed in May 2012) with the aim of markedly increasing the proportion of women in leading academic positions within the following five years. In 2010, women accounted for 21 % of the members of university bodies and 12 % of senior management positions at universities were held by women (She figures 2012).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Germany is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the Federal Government has initiated a number of activities to promote open access such as a dialogue between science organisations and scientific publishing companies. The Federal Government has recently incorporated a secondary publication right in the German copyright act in order to to strengthen open access. Scientists and researchers now have the legal right to self-archive their publications in the authors version in the Internet 12 month after the first publication. BMBF also plans to add a clause on open access to the auxiliary terms and conditions governing its project funding.

Through the Priority Initiative 'Digital Information', the Alliance of German Research Organisations aims to improve the provision of information in research and teaching by raising awareness and putting forward recommendations and guidelines for the implementation of open access and promoting funding for open access publications          

The Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Scientific Knowledge was introduced by MPG in 2003 and was signed by 53 German Institutions, including the big research organisations including the German Rectors’ Conference which represents 258 universities and other HEIs. The signatory institutions are obliged to support open access.

Since 2006, the DFG has guidelines for providing open access to project results. The DFG provides lump sums for covering publication costs including open access fees and also has a funding programme 'Open Access Publizieren' by which universities can apply for funding in order to cover open access publication charges by university-based authors.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, Germany supports it.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, the Federal Government gives high priority to the topic of scientific information infrastructures, because they play a key role in the storage of scientific knowledge and in making it accessible. The German Council of Science and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat) issued recommendations for the further development of scientific information infrastructures in July 2012. The Federal Government and the Länder have appointed a working group on the implementation of the Council's recommendations, which will also review the various European Commission proposals.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private sectors, Germany has included knowledge transfer strategies at federal and regional level in the High-Tech Strategy 2020 (national innovation strategy) respectively in the Innovation Strategies of the Länder. One of the priorities of the High-Tech Strategy is to improve cooperation between science and industry so that scientific knowledge can be transferred more quickly and applied on a commercial scale more efficiently. 

The Higher Education Laws in all of Germany's 16 Länder have now identified knowledge and technology transfer as a task for institutions of higher education. Moreover, the Länder Hesse, Lower Saxony, North-Rhine Westphalia (NRW) and Thuringia have taken up the development of an intellectual property strategy in the target and performance agreements between the Länder and the universities.  

Several institutions are devoted to knowledge transfer to the business sector, such as Fraunhofer, technical universities, and universities of applied sciences. A prerequisite for becoming a professor at universities of applied sciences is usually three years of work experience outside the higher education sector. A Code of Practice for HEIs and other PROs (IP Charter) has been compiled by the Joint Science Conference (GWK) and has become national strategy.         

TechnologieAllianz unites patent marketing agencies and technology transfer agencies in a single network. The nationwide association representing over 200 scientific institutes provides enterprises with access to the entire range of innovative research results from German universities and non-university research institutions.

A number of different competitions and funding initiatives are implementing the High-Tech Strategy, including the Innovation Alliances partnering academia and industry, the Cluster-Platform Germany with programmes the Leading-Edge Cluster Competition and go-Cluster, the 'Research Campus - public-private partnership for innovations', the newly launched '2020 - partnership for innovation' funding programme, and the 'Validation of the Innovation Potential of Scientific Research-VIP' which stimulates knowlegde transfer by public research organisations. Other programmes such as ‘Research at Universities of Applied Sciences Programme’ (prolonged until 2018), ‘Networks of Competence scheme’ ZIM Programme for SMEs and Industrial Collective Research Programme programmes support academia-industry cooperation for knowledge transfer and innovation. Some other programmes are often funded at the Länder level and some by the Economics Ministries both at federal (for example the programme KOINNO – since March 2014 in cooperation with Switzerland) or Länder level.

Knowledge transfer measures of science organisations that signed the Pact for Research and Innovation are monitored, however, there is no national monitoring system is in place.

Strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Germany. Innovation Alliances represent a new instrument for research and innovation policy within the framework of the High-Tech strategy. Currently, there are nine Innovation Alliances and a large number of “strategic partnerships” created by the BMBF, the scientific community and industry. The Leading-Edge Cluster Competition (Spitzencluster-Wettbewerb) is aimed at high-performance clusters formed by business and science that enter into strategic partnerships. The Research Campus programme contributes to knowledge circulation by enhancing partnerships, which are aiming to develop new technologies in areas with high technological complexity and a great potential for radical innovation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 79 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Germany who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

The Federal Government has developed a new Information and Communication and Technology (ICT) strategy for the digital future of Germany: Digital Germany 2015. It sets out the Government ICT policy framework, i.e. the priorities, tasks and projects for the period up to 2015. The strategy, which also deals with R&D and education aspects, will be carried out in close interaction among policymakers, industry and scientists. The Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, BMWi, is in charge of coordinating the implementation under the specific purviews of the various ministries. A major role here is played by the National IT Summit.       

The Federal Government in Germany will develop a Digital Agenda 2014-2017 as a cross-departemental strategy to address the various issues of digitisation in a comprehensive approach. The action field 'Research, Education and Culture'  will help the areas of education, science and research to make better use of the opportunities of digitisation offers, e.g. ensuring open access to scientific information and improve scholarly communication.

The Deutsche Forschungsnetz (DFN) is the German National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country and essential to make digital services possible.

Concerning digital services, the country provides premium services.  The recommendations of the Wissenschaftsrat for the further development of scientific information infrastructures in Germany up to 2020 also refers to a number of issues related to the electronic identity and digital research services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Germany was already a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations, through DFN. To date, electronic identities that are not linked to a specific institution are only available to researchers in Germany to a limited extent, via their national identity card.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 53.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Germany, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 127 research performing organisations in Germany answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 22.8% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Germany shows that 65.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 26.8 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 7.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 90.3 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 8.6 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.1 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

For the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by ministries without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence the percentage is relatively high compared to official figures.

For the indicator 'Public funding allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D as % of total budget in the sample' it should be noted that only data for food & agiculture are available. As a consequence the percentage is relatively low.

For the indicator ' Share of funders which can base their project based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews' only data are available for the food sector. As a consequence the percentage is relatively low.

For the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations' there are hardly any data. As a consequence the percentages are low.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Strategy of the Federal Government on the European Research Area (ERA) - Guidelines and National Roadmap || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

SME Innovative || 2007 || ||

Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance || 2005 || ||

DFG - German Research Council (Förderverfahren der DFG) || || ||

Project funding (programmes) || 2006 || ||

Funding procedures of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) since 1951, regularly updated || || ||

Non-university research institutes (Außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen) - HGF, FHG, MPG, WGL (different dates) || || ||

R&I funding system: general application of international peer review principles || || ||

Initiative for excellence (Excellenz Initiative) || 2012 || X ||

Excellence Initiative  for Cutting-edge Research at Institutions of Higher Education || 2014 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Academic Freedom Act || 2012 || X ||

Higher Education Pact (Hochschulpakt) - reform initiative || 2011 || ||

Leading-Edge Cluster Top Cluster Competition || 2007 || ||

R&I funding system: project funding || 2006 || ||

R&I funding system: institutional funding || || ||

Institutional funding (non-university research institutes) - Fraunhofer Gesellschaft (since 1949) || || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding (G8 Research Councils) || 2010 || ||

High-Tech Strategy 2020 (since 2006) || 2010 || ||

Internationalisation Strategy || 2008 || ||

Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) || 2008 || ||

French-German Agenda 2020 (since 2010) || 2014 || X || X

ERA-NET ERA-NET+ || 2006 || ||

Upper Rhine Bi-national Metropolitan Region science programme || 2011 || ||

Participation in Article 185 measures || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

D-A-CH’ agreement ("Lead Agency" process) - DACH Abkommen || 2009 || ||

The G8 Research Councils Initiative on Multilateral Research Funding || 2010 || ||

EIROs - participation of Germany || || ||

Guidelines for the participation of the BMBF in the preparation and implementation of transnational calls for proposals (Leitfaden des BMBF zur transnationalen Zusammenarbeit) || 2008 || ||

Participation in Article 185 measures || 2007 || ||

The Joint Initiative for Research and Innovation II: Internationalisation strategies of the science organisations || 2009 || ||

Internationalisation Strategy || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National research infrastructure roadmap 2013 (Roadmap für Forschungsinfrastrukturen – Pilotprojekt des BMBF) || 2013 || X || X

ESFRI - German contribution || || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Internationalisation Strategy || 2008 || ||

Implementation EC Regulation on ERIC || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

EURAXESS Germany portal || || ||

Attractive careers

Foreign Skills Approval and Recognition Law || 2012 || X ||

Plan to improve the social security and pension situation of mobile researchers || 2010 || ||

Report on the Promotion of Young Researchers (BuWin) || 2008 || ||

Principles for appointing research staff by non-university institutions (HGF, FhG, MPG, WGL) || || ||

Programmes encouraging excellent foreign scientists to spend research periods in Germany || || ||

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Cooperative Doctoral Programme (Baden-Württemberg) || 2010 || ||

International and inter-sectoral mobility

Programmes offering financial support to German researchers to spend periods abroad || || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungs-gesetz) || 2006 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Center of Excellence Women and Science (CEWS) || 2000 || ||

Female professors’ programme || 2007 || ||

Woman at the Top (Frauen an die Spitze) || 2006 || ||

General Anti-Discrimination Act - Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG) || 2006 || ||

National Pact for Woman in MINT careers || 2008 || ||

Higher Education Laws in the German Länder (Hochschulgesetze der Länder) || || ||

Targets for gender balance set by Joint Science Conference (GWK) || 2011 || ||

Programmes at Länder level to enhance equal opportunities at universities || || ||

Campaign to promote equal opportunities for men and women in research (Offensive für Chancengleichheit von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern) || 2006 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities || 2003 || ||

The German Research Foundation (DFG) has tied Open Access to its funding policy || 2006 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Research Campus: public-private Partnership for Innovation || 2011 || ||

go-innovativ’ -Vouchers for Innovation Consulting and Management || 2010 || ||

Validation of Innovation Potentials - VIP || 2010 || ||

Research at Universities of Applied Sciences || 2005 || ||

IGF -Promotion of Joint Industrial Research and Initiative Programme Future Technologies for SMEs (ZUTECH) || 1954 || ||

Innovation Alliances || 2007 || ||

National Agency for Women Start-ups Activities and Services || 2004 || ||

EXIST - Start-ups from Science (also: EXIST - University-based business Start-ups) || 1999 || ||

ERP Start-up Fund || 1995 || ||

High-tech Start-up Fund || 2005 || ||

Networks of Competence || 1999 || ||

Fostering the innovation dimension of research: SIGNO, EXIST || || ||

National strategy to implement the Commission Recommendation on management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and on a Code of practice for universities and other public research organisations (IP Charter) by the Joint Science Confe || 2010 || ||

TechnologieAllianz network || 2001 || ||

Regional laws on knowledge and technology transfer as a task for German institutions of Higher Education || || ||

Secondary publication right implemented in German Copyright law || 2006 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Digital Germany 2015 || 2010 || ||

Advice and federal working group with the German Länder on scientific information infrastructures (on-going) || 2012 || X ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Initiatives towards e-identity (DFN-AAI, eduGAIN) || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The Ministry of Higher Education and Science has the main responsibility for research and innovation (R&I) in Denmark. However, the Ministry of Business and Growth has certain tasks related to business development, and several sectorial ministries – such as  the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building, the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – have larger research, development and innovation (RD&I)            programmes. In addition, the ministries have specific agencies that implement the respective policies.

The main R&I funding comes from the Danish National Research Foundation, the Danish Council for Independent Research, the Danish Innovation Foundation, and several sectorial R&D programmes. Another key funding source is the University Basic Research Funding, i.e. the allocated basic university grants provided to the universities from the annual national budget. In 2013, the Danish Government started in 2013 a process aimed at combining into the Danish Innovation Foundation the following bodies: the Danish Council for Strategic Research, the Danish Council for Technology and Innovation, and the Danish Advanced Technology Foundation. This reorganisation was partly based on input from the European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) Peer Review from 2012. In October, an agreement was reached stipulating that the new innovation fund shall be equipped with an annual budget of €200 million. The fund has been operational since April 2014.

The main knowledge producers in the Danish R&D system are the universities along with a few Government research institutes and a network of private, non-profit R&D organisations. The main collaboration partners of the private sector are nine institutes, belonging to the Advanced Technology Group (“Godkendte Teknologiske Serviceinstitutter”).

The country has adopted a national strategy for Research and Innovation. In 2013, the Danish Government launched Denmark’s first comprehensive innovation strategy “Denmark – Nation of Solutions” based on collaborative efforts between the involved ministries, i.e. the Ministry of Higher Education and Science, the Ministry of Business and Growth and other relevant sectorial ministries, as well as stakeholders from the Danish innovation system. In connection with the new innovation strategy the Danish Government has started a process that led to the creation of the first INNO+ catalogue presented in September 2013 which defines 21 concrete areas for R&I geared towards finding solutions to the grand societal challenges.

The Danish National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 describes new support instruments to promote R&I to, such as societal partnerships, tax incentives, SMEs activities and cluster policy.

Denmark has also been engaged in a process called RESEARCH2020 that identifies areas of effort that form the basis for the political prioritization of funds for strategic research, basis for decision making for the prioritization of funds.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Denmark represented EUR 451 per inhabitant in 2012 more than twice and a half higher than the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant increased to reach EUR 455. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.7% of total government expenditures and 1% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Denmark has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Denmark, measured as percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison, in the EU27 the rate of growth of GBAORD measured as percentage of public government expenditure evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Denmark even when it regressed at EU28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

According to a Joint Research Centre-Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS) study on European university funding and financial autonomy (2011), the Danish universities funding consists of 59 % core funding, 12 % competitive funding, 4 % industrial funding, 1% non-profit sector funding and 2 % EU funding. However, no official statistics on this topic exist.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

Allocation of research funds is based on the principles of international peer review. Research projects are selected on the basis of the quality of proposals and expected results and they are subject to external peer review.

For example, the Danish Council for Strategic Research, which is now a part of the Danish Innovation Foundation,  has established a peer review panel that is intended to strengthen the quality of the project reviews. Assessments made by members of the peer review panel are complemented with assessments provided by the council committees of internationally recognised academics. The Danish Council for Independent Research uses peer review panels and individual peer reviews for assessing applications. Assessments made by the peer review panels and individual reviews are complemented with assessments provided by research council members who are also internationally recognized academics.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Danish universities’ funding is based on a benchmark made on the basis of internationally recognised criteria and performance contracts with the Ministry of Higher Education and Science.  In June 2009, a political agreement was reached on a new distribution model for core funding to the universities. The new distribution model is a modification of the former 50–40–10 model, which covered indicators for education, external funding and PhD graduates. The new model includes bibliometric indicators and has been introduced gradually over the period 2010–2012. The distribution for 2012 is as follows: 45% is based on education appropriations, 20% is based on external funding of R&D activities, 25% is based on bibliometric indicators, and 10% is based on PhD graduates.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 22.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It also strongly supports bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 18.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 16.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Denmark allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Denmark dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), Denmark’s total share of participation is 2.4% and the country received 2.6% of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 170 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.8% of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3% of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all the 10 on-going initiatives. Denmark is the coordinator of Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in four of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in more than 40 ERA-NETs, of which 15 are currently still running. The country also has participated in seven ERA-NET Plus actions - of which five are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals. Denmark is coordinating three existing ERA-NETs.

Denmark is actively cooperating with other Nordic countries in joint programmes and institutions within the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordic cooperation involves Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as well as the three autonomous areas, the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands. The organisation of the Nordic collaboration in research and innovation is based on two main pillars: NordForsk (research) and Nordic Innovation (formerly The Nordic Innovation Centre, NICE). In 2008, the Nordic Prime Ministers initiated the Top-level Research Initiative (TRI), which is until now the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative that has a research focus on the climate, environment and energy fields.

In 2014 initiatives to strengthen the Arctic research were taken. The goal is to enhance national coordination of arctic research, arctic education and activities related to Arctic research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the Ministry of Higher Education and Science initiated several cooperation agreements and different policy measures to ensure an improved exchange between knowledge communities in Denmark and outside Europe. Among these are Memorandums of Understanding on research and innovation with countries such as Turkey and South Korea.

Denmark has developed specific strategies for Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC-countries) to improve trade and investment, in fields such as climate and energy, welfare, architecture, research, education and food. Denmark has established innovation centres in hotspots around the world and as part of its national Innovation Strategy. To complement its already existing innovation centers in Shanghai, Silicon Valley and Munich, Denmark opened three new innovation centres in New Delhi, Bangalore, Seoul and Sao Paulo in 2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Denmark allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is similar to the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Regarding cross border access to funding, Danish schemes are open to researchers based abroad, regardless of their nationality, provided that their research is judged to be of benefit to Danish research. The Research Council law allows the national research councils to allocate up to 20 % of their funds to international initiatives. These initiatives are allowed to administer the funds on behalf of the Danish research councils on a real common pot model as long as it benefits Danish research and fulfils other general principles. Furthermore, the Council funds are generally available to international researchers.

The Danish Council for Independent Research and the National Research Foundation participate in Science Europe. The Danish Council for Strategic Research (now a part of the Danish Innovation Foundation) has signed the letter of intent “Money Follows Researcher”, which allows researchers to move to other countries and take the remainder of any awarded grant with them.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 87.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Denmark allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Denmark participates in the following large international research infrastructures: the European Space Agency (ESA), the Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL).

The country contributes 0,86% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, ILL and the JRC (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures (RI) included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 14 of them (29% of the RI in the roadmap). The country coordinates one RI, namely WINDSCANNER.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of ESFRI Research Infrastructures, Denmark is committed to funding : CESSDA, CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH,  E-ELT, EPOS, EATRIS, ELIXIR, (INSTRUCT), ESRF UPGRADE, ESSneutrons, XFEL and (PRACE).

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Denmark is involved in three of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries, namely CLARIN ERIC, EATRIS ERIC and DARIAH ERIC.

To support the development and implementation of Research Infrastructures, the availability of high quality research infrastructures has been addressed in policy actions over several years. Public investments in research and innovation have been prioritised and budgeted for over the last years to ensure predictability and long term impact.

The national roadmap for Research Infrastructures presents a complete and prioritised catalogue of the national needs for research infrastructures in the short term and charts a strategic direction for national initiatives in the field.

The roadmap includes clear references to the participation of Denmark in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. The national roadmap will be updated in 2015 in parallel with the ESFRI update process.

The total Danish funding committed to the construction and operation of the research infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap since 2006 is estimated at DKR 720 million.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by Denmark, access to four of them has been funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Denmark in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Denmark_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 37,944 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Denmark in 2011. This represents 13.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 13.0 in Denmark compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 65% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The common government rules on posting positions and making appointments, including requirements on the prohibition of discrimination, open recruitment and objective justifications, apply to scientific positions. For scientific employees, the rules are supplemented by the Ministerial Order on the Appointment of Academic Staff at Universities (2012). Under this Order, positions at professor and associate professor level must be advertised internationally, and an assessment takes place according to local rules at each university. The Order is designed to increase international mobility as well as open competition, hence providing Danish universities with the best possible talent. The Rector may grant an exemption from this provision in the event of special circumstances of an academic nature. A non-prioritised, reasoned and written assessment of the applicants’ academic qualifications is submitted to the Rector. The committee must submit its assessment within a time limit set by the Rector. In the event of differences of opinion between the members of the committee, this must be stated in the assessment.

Under the Public Administration Act (1985), the applicant can always require a written explanation of the decision. The applicant has the right to appeal to the institution to which he/she has applied for a job.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

All Danish universities have signed the ‘Charter & Code’ and are to a high degree following its principles, which are perceived as normal practice within Danish research institutions. By May 2014, three Danish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which one had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The Job Structure for Academic Staff at Universities, the Collective Agreement for Academics in the State and the Act on Universities (in particular, points 2, 15 and 29) constitute a researcher statute by addressing wage and employment conditions (for instance pension schemes, maternity/paternity leave and long-term illness) and career prospects. In 2013 the Job Structure for Academic Staff at Universities was revised and resulted in an updated and more contemporary job structure. It includes provisions for a coherent researcher career progression, significantly revising also the principal position of assistant professor. A permanent assistant professorship may now be granted for a period of up to six years (only four years previously). As part of the position, the assistant professor may transfer directly to a position of associate professor/senior researcher provided that the employee is recommended for assessment and is deemed qualified. The revision has been welcomed by the Danish universities which will use the permanent assistant professorship as a tenure track position.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 2.3 in 2011 compared to 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Danish PhD Programme (under the Ministerial Order on the PhD Programme at the Universities, 2007) is designed by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science to provide young researchers with skills to contribute to a knowledge-based economy and society in Denmark. The PhD Programme is a research programme aimed at training PhD students at an international level to undertake research, development and teaching assignments in the private and public sectors for which a broad knowledge of research is required.

The regulation on PhD programmes was amended in 2010 in order to improve the possibilities for universities to enter into mutually binding collaboration in research and education with foreign universities. The regulation was amended again in 2013 in order to focus on providing the best opportunities for international collaboration in PhD education. On 1 September 2012, a publicly available website was launched in English with short presentations of PhD courses offered at all graduate schools in Denmark (http://phdcourses.dk/). This website gives PhD students an overview of the total offer of PhD courses in Denmark across universities.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 13.8% in Denmark compared with 9.1% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 17.7% in Denmark compared with 14.4% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

In 2014, an action plan ‘Denmark – an attractive study destination - How to attract and retain talent from abroad’ was launched as part of the government’s effort to increase the internationalisation of higher education. The action plan includes concrete initiatives to make international graduates’ transition to the Danish labour market easier. International graduates from non-EU/EEA countries who have completed a Master’s or PhD programme in Denmark, should have the opportunity to apply for a start-up permit giving them the right to seek employment and work in Denmark for two years. A start-up permit will also – unlike the current Greencard scheme – allow the graduate the opportunity to start their own company. The plan will also ensure that all fully-fledged PhDs are granted a six-month jobseeker’s residence permit, and the rules for applying for a residence permit are simplified.

The Industrial PhD Programme aims to offer doctoral training in cooperation with the industry sector. It is a three-year research project and research training programme with an industrial focus conducted jointly by a private company, an industrial PhD student and a university. The student is employed by the company and enrolled at the university. The company hires the Industrial PhD for the three-year duration of the project as a full-time employee on ordinary terms for salaried employees. The salary is agreed between the student and the company, and must correspond as a minimum to the pay rate of the collective agreement for PhD students employed by the Danish State. The company receives a subsidy to cover approximately half the student’s salary, and the enrolling university receives a subsidy to cover tuition fees. The Programme includes a compulsory business course so that students understand the commercial aspects of research and innovation projects. It inspired the European Parliament to fund the kick-start of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie European Industrial doctorates.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

General legislation on gender equality

The Minister for Gender Equality is responsible for the Government's overall activities in the field of gender equality and co-ordinates the equality work of other ministries.

On a general level, the Danish Gender Equality Act (GEA), as revised in 2013, stipulates among other things that boards, assemblies of representatives or similar collective management bodies within the public administration ought to have an equal gender balance. This is also the case for public research councils, universities etc.

In addition to gender equality targets, institutions and companies in public administration are obliged to formulate gender equality policies concerning the underrepresented gender on a managerial level. This is only a requirement for institutions and companies with 50 employees or more e.g. all Danish universities.

The country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in research programmes and/or projects. The Councils monitor the gender balance in their funding. Gender specific measures are included in the performance contracts with universities, where all universities are encouraged to include a focus area working for equal opportunities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 22.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 17.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The country provides incentives for the recruitment of female researchers.  Some Danish universities included gender equality in their development contracts with the ministries. This practice potentially results in an extra bonus, which is seen as an incentive. Danish Gender Equality Act specially allocates an additional professorship chair (off faculty plan) if a department reaches a certain number of female professor appointees. Also the new Danish ‘Sapere Aude’ programme aims to encourage more women to become research leaders.

For example, the “Young women devoted to a university career programme” has been earmarked to ensure a more gender mix in research environments in Denmark (NRP 2014).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The country has a dedicated budget for programmes funding women/gender studies. The annual report form the Research Forum and the Research Councils will for the future include relevant gender divided statistics.

In 2013, the Council of Independent Research commissioned a study on the role of gender in research and excellence (Det Frie Forskningsråd, 2013), mapping gender aspects and differences in the Danish R&I system.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 60.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey indicated that they do not support gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Gender equality at the Danish universities

The Ministry of Higher Education and Science and the 8 Danish universities sign development contracts every three years. Some of the Danish universities have included goals and activities for gender equality in their development contracts with the ministry.

The ministry is supervising the universities on a regular basis. In 2013 and 2014, the ministry has systematically surveyed the status for gender equality at each university in the supervision

Some of the universities have initiated their own gender equality initiatives after a special autorisation of the Gender Equality Act (GEA). E.g. the University of Copenhagen has implemented a gender equality action plan for 2008-13 e.g. giving economic incentives to faculties hiring female professors.

Gender equality and the Danish research councils

The Danish Council for Independent Research has in particular emphasised gender equality in their work and practice. In 2013, the Danish Council for Independent Research commissioned a study on the role of gender in research and excellence mapping gender aspects and differences in the Danish research system with special focus on applications to and grants from the Danish Council for Independent Research. The study was followed by a conference on the role of gender in research and excellence. In 2013, the Council also adopted an equality policy. The policy set goals for both the success rates of grants awarded by the council and for the composition of the council itself and its subcouncils.

In 2014 the council presented a call for the new “Younger women Devoted to a University career Programme (YDUN-programme)” in order to stimulate the research careers of female researchers by encouraging them to apply for research funding at the council.

The council also issue gender divided statistics regarding the awarded grants.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 21.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Denmark is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

The Danish Government supports open access. An Open Access Committee was appointed under the steering committee for Denmark's Electronic Research Library (DEFF). In March 2011 the Open Access Committee published recommendations for implementing of open access in Denmark (Danish Agency for Libraries and Media, 2011).  Based on the recommendations, the Danish Government adopted a policy on open access to research articles in June 2014. The coordination and development of the national policy will be implemented by a national steering committee appointed by the Minister for Higher Education and Science in April 2014.

The implementation of Open Access is well under way among Danish universities, public research councils and foundations. In June 2012, public research councils and foundations implemented a joint open access-policy. This policy advocates green open access and requires the deposit of a digital version of the research article to a repository after the article has been accepted. Furthermore, seven out of the eight universities in Denmark have introduced Open Access policies.

Related to open access to publications, initiatives exist at national level through soft requirements to foster the development of open access to scientific publications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 88.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, in Denmark, there are no open access and preservation policies related to research data. Though, some initiatives relating to OA to data have been implemented. The awareness of OA is mainly within the research library community, but the interest in the topic is growing in the university administrations and research policy. Three Danish universities have policies and other universities are engaging in on-going work regarding OA. Furthermore, in recent years it has been a requirement that researchers receiving grants from the Danish Research Council for Independent Research, must hand over their datasets to the Danish National Archives, which in turn have a an online platform for re-using researcher data and an advisory service to facilitate reuse of data. Though, the requirement to handover datasets is not enforced rigorously. Furthermore, all researcher datasets generated through Statistics Denmark are accessible online through Statistics Denmark after a waiting period. However, this does not include data that has been provided by the researchers themselves. It only applies to the registry data from Statistics Denmark.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Research infrastructures funded by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science are open to all Danish researchers. In principle this also includes the data which is generated from the research infrastructure.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, regulatory policies exist to support knowledge transfer between public research institutions and industry, the establishment of research-based enterprises and cooperation between public research institutions, associations and foundations.

Knowledge transfer is strongly embedded in the new Innovation Strategy Denmark adopted in 2013.

In conjunction with the establishment of the Danish Innovation Foundation in 2013, a broad evaluation of the knowledge cooperation between knowledge institutions and businesses is to be conducted during 2014 with the aim of assessing the need of new measures in the field.[NRP 2014]

In connection with the new innovation strategy the Danish Government has started a process that led to the creation of the first INNO+ catalogue presented in September 2013, which provides funding organisations with specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer.

There are several funding instruments targeted at increasing R&D cooperation between the business sector and public research organisations.  Inter-sectoral mobility of researchers is high in Denmark in comparison to other EU-28 countries - approximately 80 % of the industrial PhD programmes contribute to improved mobility between universities and companies while only around 20 % of traditional PhDs gets positions in the private sector. Moreover, public-private knowledge transfer is ensured by the involvement of representatives from the private sector in the governance of higher education institutions. In several universities, the majority of board members are external members and some of them come from the private sector.

Strategic partnership and the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Denmark.  Some examples may be illustrated by the following measures:

-           Clusters - Innovation Network Denmark supports networking and matchmaking activities with the private sector

-           Industrial Post-doc programme supports the implementation of research training agreements with private sector organisations

-           Innovation Assistant (Knowledge Pilot) scheme supports structured programmes for placements in the private sector for researchers

-           Innovation Voucher Scheme incentivises more SME’s to require knowledge from research institutions

-           The IPR Package developed by the Danish Patent and Trademark Office and the five regional Growth Houses supports IPR needs

There are also measures on technology transfer, science parks and university business incubators in Denmark.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 63.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Denmark who responded to the survey and support national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Denmark has had a national research and education network – NREN – for a number of years which is essential to make digital services possible. For the last decade the Ministry of Higher Education and Science has also provided funding and an organisational structure for handling High Performance Computing (HPC) and Grid computing and other e-science matters.  In recent years, the NREN and the HPC organisations have been merged into the Danish E-infrastructure Collaboration – DEIC – thereby creating one single governing board handling all e-infrastructure issues of national relevance. The mission and task of DEIC is to strengthen and facilitate e-Science collaboration, to contribute to coherence, synergy and cost-effectiveness, to ensure that Danish e-science is at a high international level, to formulate and implement strategies and initiatives, to develop new instruments for challenges regarding HPC, networks, storage, etc. and to support and coordinate training and counselling activities on e-Science.

DEIC is a collaboration between Universities, University Colleges and other educational and scientific institutions in Denmark plus the Ministry of Higher Education and Science.  The establishment of a single entity creates a much more coherent e-science policy, more focus on total cost of ownership and needs of scientists. It also ensures that all matters of e-Science and E-infrastructure investment becomes a strategic priority of Danish scientific institutions.

Denmark’s Electronic Research Library (DEFF) is an organisational and technological collaboration between the research libraries, the education libraries and the special libraries, co-financed and co-governed by the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Higher Education and Science.

The objective of DEFF is to enhance the development of a network of electronic libraries that make their electronic and information resources available to the users in a cohesive and simple way.

DEFF funds joint development projects, development of the infrastructure and administers joint purchases of licenses. DEFF may provide subsidies for international activities. DEFF negotiates and signs contracts for electronic licenses on behalf of the research libraries.

Concerning digital services, the country provides Premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 70.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 28.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Denmark was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations.

In Danish academia a Single Sign-On system called WAYF (Where Are You From) has been established. WAYF permits using one single login to access several web based services. With the WAYF infrastructure, people from the research and educational sector in Denmark can reuse user name and password from their institution to access services outside the institution itself.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Denmark, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 29 research performing organisations in Denmark answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 33.4% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Denmark shows that 16.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 56.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 28.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 71.4 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 28.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.3 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

It should be noted that the low results observed in several indicators for RPOs is due on the one hand to the absence of some important organisations among the ones which answered the survey. On the other hand, the organisations which answered the survey did not always provide the information requested for several issues (i.e. open access to publications, gender).

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Innovation strategy "Denmark - Nation of Solutions" || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Peer Review College of the Danish Council for Strategic Research || 2012 || X ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Forks2020 process || 2013 || X || X

New university funding model || 2013 || X || X

Finance Act Agreement || 2013 || X || X

RESEARCH2020 catalogue || 2013 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Openness of National Research Council funding || || ||

Funding schemes open to researchers abroad || || ||

Funding provided by the Nordic Innovation Centre (NICE) || 2012 || X ||

Money follows researcher (MFR) initiative in Denmark || 2009 || ||

Top-level Research Initiative || 2008 || ||

Collaboration agreements || || ||

Strategic Research Alliance Strategic Network Project scheme || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National research infrastructure roadmap || 2011 || ||

Globalisation Fund || 2006 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

START-scheme || || ||

Attractive careers

Euraxess in Denmark || || ||

Ministerial order on the appointment of academic staff at universities || 2012 || X ||

Implementation of "Charter for Researchers" and "Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers" || 2009 || ||

The Charter and Code were debated by the Human Resources group, the Danish Committee of University Directors and the Danish Rectors’ Conference. || 2009 || ||

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Industrial PhD Program || 2002 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Council of Independent Research Conference on the role of gender in research and excellence || 2013 || X || X

Gender Equality Act (GEA) (revision) || 2013 || X || X

Younger women Devoited to a University career Programme || 2014 || X || X

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open Access Committee || 2011 || ||

Joint Open Access Policy || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Globalisation Fund || 2010 || ||

Innovation strategy "Denmark - Nation of Solutions" || 2013 || X || X

Small and medium-sized businesses initiative for interaction between SMEs and knowledge institutions || 2011 || ||

Strategic Platforms for Innovation and Research (SPIR) || 2010 || ||

Act on Inventions at Public Research Institutions || 1999 || ||

Act on Technology Transfer at Public Research Institutions || 2004 || ||

National Network for Technology Transfer || || ||

INNO+ Catalogue || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Danish e-Infrastructure Cooperation (DeIC) || 2012 || X ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The Ministry of Education and Research (MER) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MEAC) share the overall responsibility for research and innovation (R&I) policy in Estonia. Both are responsible for strategic planning (including policy studies), implementing the policies in cooperation with the intermediate bodies, as well as supervising and evaluating the policy implementation. But, while MER is responsible for research and education policies, financing and evaluating research institutes and coordinating international cooperation in research, MEAC supervises support for and funding of industrial research and development (R&D), as well as planning, coordinating and implementing the innovation policy. Two permanent advisory bodies (the Research Policy Committee and the Research Competence Council) provide advice to MER, while the Innovation Policy Commission advises MEAC. In addition, the Research and Development Council (R&D Council) is an expert consultative body that advises the Government on R&D and innovation matters. All policy documents on the way for approval by the Government have to pass through this R&D Council.

Estonia has adopted a national strategy for R&I. Research, development and innovation (RD&I) strategic objectives and principles of management and financing are set in the new RDI Strategy (‘Knowledge-based Estonia’) for 2014-2020, launched in January 2014. This third RDI Strategy is supplemented by an implementation plan that provides a predictable policy framework for short and medium-term planning, via annual implementation plans, investment plans, etc. While the previous strategy primarily focused on developing Estonia's capability in RD&I, the new strategy for 2014-2020 focuses on tapping into the created potential and creates good framework conditions for developing and focusing on the social and economic effects of RD&I. In the setting of priorities, the methodology of smart specialisation served as a basis. The strategy identifies four key goals:

• For high-level and diverse Estonian research,

• For research and development (R&D) activity to be conducted in the interest of the Estonian society and economy,

• For R&D to make the structure of the economy more knowledge intensive,

• And for Estonia to be active and visible in international cooperation in RD&I.

In addition, the ‘Entrepreneurship growth strategy 2014-2020’ that focuses on innovation in enterprises and also covers also cooperation between enterprises and R&D institutions, was launched in October 2013.

It should also be noticed that the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation (CSR) for Estonia invites to 'Further intensify prioritisation and specialisation in the research and innovation systems and enhance cooperation between businesses, higher education and research institutions to contribute to international competitiveness'.

The Ministry of Education and Research (MER) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MEAC) share the overall responsibility for research and innovation (R&I) policy in Estonia. Both are responsible for strategic planning (including policy studies), implementing the policies in cooperation with the intermediate bodies, as well as supervising and evaluating the policy implementation. But, while MER is responsible for research and education policies, financing and evaluating research institutes and coordinating international cooperation in research, MEAC supervises support for and funding of industrial research and development (R&D), as well as planning, coordinating and implementing the innovation policy. Two permanent advisory bodies (the Research Policy Committee and the Research Competence Council) provide advice to MER, while the Innovation Policy Commission advises MEAC. In addition, the Research and Development Council (R&D Council) is an expert consultative body that advises the Government on R&D and innovation matters. All policy documents on the way for approval by the Government have to pass through this R&D Council.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Estonia represented EUR 110 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179.2 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 122.7. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 2.12 % of total government expenditures and 0.84 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period after the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Estonia was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Estonia, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved positively. In comparison, in the EU-27 the rate of growth of GBAORD, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Estonia even when it regressed at EU-28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Concerning project-based funding, there are no official figures for Estonia. The main RD&I funders are MER and MEAC. Other ministries only count for less than 5 % of State funding. MER is mainly responsible for the funding of basic and applied research while MEAC is rather in charge of the funding of technology development and innovation. In 2012, the share of competitive versus institutional funding in the R&D national budget of MER was respectively 70 % (targeted financing and institutional research funding and European Training Foundation (ETF) grants and personal research funding) and 30 % (baseline funding and support to the maintenance of R&D infrastructures). Most of the funding from the MEAC budget is also competitive.

New (2012) competitive funding instruments are institutional research funding (EUR 22.97 million; 53 % of state budget) and personal research funding (EUR 7.22 million; 17 %). This means that, since 2013, only baseline funding (17 % of funding allocated directly to research institutions) was not based on competition, while support from European Union Structural Funds, being of temporary character, was not considered as a direct funding. Relevant amendments were introduced in the Organisation of Research and Development Act in 2012. The implementation of the institutional research funding has however been challenging and still needs some adjustment. The MEAC funding instruments include a very high share from EU Structural funds. In 2011 and 2012, 64 % of all public sectors RDI funding was financed by Structural Funds, so the main regulation, which sets the rules is the 2007-2013 Structural Assistance Act and related acts and procedures, designed for special measures and funds. R&D national budget is channelled through four funding agencies. MER governs three of them: Archimedes Foundation, the Estonian Research Council (substituting the Estonian Science Foundation in March 2012) and the Innove Foundation, while MEAC governs the Enterprise Estonia Foundation. MEAC exerts also tutorship on Foundation KredEx, which offers financial services (loans, venture capital, credit insurance and guarantees with state guarantee) aimed at helping enterprises to develop quicker.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

Allocated funds are mostly competitive and the evaluation on projects follows the international peer review core principles.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional part of public RDI funding from the state budget is rather limited in Estonia. In 2012, there were two main ‘block funding’: ‘baseline funding’ (EUR 7.16 million; 16 % of state budget) and ‘support to the maintenance of R&D infrastructures’ (EUR 6.07 million; 14 %). Criteria for allocating block funds for RDI institutions are set in the Organisation of Research and Development Act (introduced in 1997, last update in 2012).

Introduced in 2005, annual baseline funding is allocated to R&D institutions if they have received a regular positive evaluation using the following methodology: first 5 % is allocated to humanitarian research of national significance; the remaining 95 % is distributed according to the performance; 50 % in proportion with the number of high level publications in internationally-recognised journals, the number of high level research monographs and the number of registered patents and patent applications; 40 % in proportion with the amount of financing of R&D from other sources i.e. targeted research, commissioned by enterprises, municipalities, ministries, etc. and 10 % in proportion with the number of doctoral graduates. Infrastructure expenses and institutional research funding are allocated to institutions whose R&D activities have received a regular positive evaluation in at least one field, as a threshold criteria giving right to present an application.

Annual baseline funding is allocated for strategic goals, co-financing foreign and domestic projects, opening up new research directions, etc. Since 2013, 'Support to maintenance of R&D infrastructures' has been included to institutional funding, entirely in the form of overhead expenses.

A regular evaluation of Estonian public organisations is carried out every 7 years by international experts. A threshold has been set to get access to the main research budgetary instruments. The evaluation is based on patents, publications, PhDs, etc. This applies to all institutions: universities, public research organisations and private organisations receiving institutional funding.

The Estonian Research Council manages the funding flows of the Ministry of Education and Research, such as institutional research funding for high-level R&D and related activities and personal and post-doctoral research funding for research activities of individuals or research groups. The Estonian Research Council is also responsible for national activities concerning the European Research Area (ERA), notably EURAXESS Services and serves as National Contact Point for Horizon 2020 and COST. Also governed by the Ministry of Education and Research, Archimedes Foundation is the implementing Agency of Structural Support for the periods 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 in the field of R&D. Enterprise Estonia Foundation and Foundation KredEx are operating under the premises of Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication and provide support for innovation and technology programmes, for instance. The target groups of these foundations are mostly enterprises, but also public research performers are addressed in case of enterprise collaboration.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 5.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. Estonia launched the programme for the internationalisation of science in 2011 (EUR 10.4 million) with the aim to support joint activities such as sharing information, joint research agenda, joint calls, joint programming and also developing ex post evaluation procedures. Most joint-financing actions are regulated by the 2007-2013 Structural Assistance Act and by the Organisation of Research and Development Act. Joint financing is welcome and project partners are selected by excellence, not by country of origin. Universities and other R&D institutions are independent and can choose their partners from any country in the world.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Estonia allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Estonia dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between the Institutions of Member States (MS), the Associated Countries and the third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), Estonia’s share for contribution in total participation is 0.4 % and the country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 61 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 6.7 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3.7 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, Estonia is participating in two of the 10 ongoing initiatives: Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change and Cultural Heritage and Global change: a new challenge for Europe. Additional preparations for participation in several other initiatives are in progress.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called article 185 initiatives), Estonia was involved in three programmes: EMRP, Eurostars and BONUS. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives: EMPIR and Eurostars2.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 29 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are currently still running. The country also has participated in six ERA-NET Plus actions, of which 4 are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

International cooperation projects are funded by the Estonian Research Council in the framework of either bilateral (the PARROT programme with France, memoranda with the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Foundation and the US Civilian Research and Development Foundation) or pan-European initiatives (EUROCORES, ERA-NET, ARTEMIS, EMBO). There are agreements in place with Baltic and Nordic partners and several exchange programmes such as the Norwegian-Estonian Research Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 and the Nordplus Programme of eight participating countries in the Baltic and Nordic regions.

Estonia has also concluded bilateral agreements in the field of education and research with the following EU and associated countries: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, United Kingdom and Turkey. Trilateral agreements between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have been signed for the exchange of students, scientists and teachers (in force from 2012 to 2016) as well as a mutual understanding memorandum for cooperation in higher education, science and innovation (in force from 2013 to 2020).

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. However, Estonia has the following bilateral agreements with third countries:

- With the United States: a general agreement on scientific and technological cooperation; specific agreements on cooperation in the fields of information technology and materials science and energy;

- With Russia in the field of humanities;

- With India in the field of biotechnology;

- With China in the fields of social sciences, physics condensed matter, genetic heredity, optics.

There are also bilateral agreements with Taiwan, Israel, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is equal to 0.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer-review standards is not supported.

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of Joint Programmes are not applied by the funding agencies in the country. In fact, Estonia has no directly relevant national legislation. Joint financing is welcome and project partners are selected by excellence, not by country of origin. Universities and other Research and Development institutions are independent and can choose their partners from any country in the world. Since 2002, world level research and cooperation is also promoted through the Centres of Excellence Programme.

Funding agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme that enables small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. Although The Estonian Research Council has adhered to the Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables researchers to move to a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives, it has not yet been implemented since there have not been any relevant applications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 46.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

Research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Estonia participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RIs): European Space Agency (ESA) and European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA). The country contributes 0.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), (Eurostat).

In terms of financial commitments to develop of these RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Estonia is committed to fund six of them: CLARIN, ESS Survey, BBMRI, EATRIS, ELIXIR and the European Spallation Source.

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Estonia is involved in four of the nine consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate establishing and operating RIs of European interest involving several European countries: CLARIN-ERIC, EATRIS ERIC, ESS ERIC and BBMRI-ERIC.

In terms of support to develop and implement RIs, Estonia relies on its Research Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 (update planned for 2014), which is a long-term (10-20 years perspective) planning instrument. This roadmap lists RI units of national importance, which are either new or need modernising. It includes references to Estonia's participation in developing the RIs mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. The budget for each component is provided in the investment plan for the sub-measure 'Modernising research infrastructure of national importance'. A number of RI investments supporting participation in international research infrastructures have been made from the Programme for the Internationalisation of Science.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Regarding access to its RIs, Estonia has no national legislation that is directly applicable. The Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 itemises national interest in specific ESFRI projects, but does not deal with rules on access to facilities. In 2014, Estonia has created a funding instrument to support open access to national core facilities.

There are no large scale RI facilities with pan-European interest in Estonia and, therefore foreign researchers and R&D institution interests in using Estonian Research Infrastructures have not been great. For several years, Estonia has used the European Structural Funds for the development of Estonian R&D infrastructure. As a consequence of the substantial impact of this funding, quality improves every year. Thus, from the R&D infrastructure development investment plan, two facilities out of nine have been finalised, and from the Programme for the Internationalisation of Science, the development of three RIs were supported and there is the possibility of participating in several others.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Estonia in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Estonia_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 4 511 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Estonia in 2011. This represents 6.5 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 51.1 in Estonia compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 63 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The trend is to publish more on online platforms. According to the Organisation of Research and Development Act, §9 and University Act, §34, all regular teaching and research positions in R&D institutions have to be filled by public competition.

The selection criteria are published in the employment regulation rules of the universities, and are available on their websites. These rules are then referred to in the advert.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

In September 2011, the Rectors’ Conference, representing all universities in Estonia, signed an 'Agreement on Good Practice Regarding Quality'. Point 10 of the Agreement refers to the implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’.

In addition, in 2011, the Rectors’ Conference participated in the second cohort of the European Commission Institutional Human Resources Strategy Group. The Estonian Research Council (previously Estonian Science Foundation) participates in the third cohort and four more R&D institutions are in the fourth cohort. The Estonian Research Council is conducting a national gap analysis which was under way in early 2014.

By May 2014, five Estonian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers.

In Estonia, funding has shifted from core to project-based funding. Therefore, the funding is oriented towards supporting high-level R&D to guarantee the consistency and sustainability of a research field in Estonia. The largest funding instruments are the institutional research funding and personal research funding. Institutional research funding enables R&D institutions to fund high-level R&D activities and to modernise and maintain the necessary infrastructure. Personal research funding is allocated for research activities of individuals or research groups. Both instruments are competition-based.

Doctoral candidates have access to health insurance, but are not eligible for sickness and unemployment benefits or pensions, unless they are hired by the university under an employment contract. In that case, they benefit from full social security coverage. Since 2012, the state has encouraged and supported universities in hiring doctoral students as early-stage researchers despite the fact that most of the doctoral candidates are already working, not necessarily as researchers, and receive full social security coverage as employees.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34 was 1.3 in 2011 compared to 1.6   among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Estonian Government focuses on enhancing of the quality and efficiency of doctoral studies by organising doctoral schools, mobility opportunities for both incoming and outgoing researchers, and developing of entrepreneurship (by introducing economic courses and modules for non-business students in all three university circles).

Doctoral schools were set up in 2005. In 2009, 13 new doctoral schools were selected for the period 2009-15. Their aim is to improve the quality of doctoral candidate tutoring and to increase the efficiency of doctoral studies in Estonia through interdisciplinary, international and national cooperation. Apart from mobility opportunities, winter and summer schools and study programmes, doctoral schools propose transferable and social skills training to promote interdisciplinary research and enhance cooperation between universities and the private sector.

From 2010, students who have interrupted their doctoral studies are welcome to continue and finish their studies (i.e. they are given a second chance). Those resuming doctoral studies may participate in doctoral schools. These help them find supervisors and participate in summer schools, conferences and mobility activities provided by doctoral schools. At least two partners need to be involved. They can be an Estonian university, an R&D institution, the public sector or companies. Doctoral schools are project-based and are funded by the European Social Fund.

The measures introduced by the Estonian Government in support of doctoral training during the 2013-2017 programming period covers activities up to 2015. New initiatives under the new R&D&I strategy are in the development phase, but doctoral studies will definitely be a key priority in research human resource policies.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 MS was 5.6 % in Estonia compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 4.2 % in Estonia compared to 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The DoRa Doctoral Studies and Internationalisation Programme (2008-15) targets Master and doctoral students and academic staff who are already working or studying at Estonian higher education institutions or are planning to do so:

-           Activity 2: Encouraging short-term visits for outgoing Estonian teaching staff for 1-6 months (eligible expenditures include a salary, travel expenses and a relocation allowance);

-           Activity 6: Developing international cooperation networks by supporting the mobility of Estonian doctoral students for 1-5 months (eligible expenses are living allowance, a travel grant);

-           Activity 7: Strengthening the international dimension in higher education by supporting the mobility of Master’s students for 1-6 months (eligible expenses are a living allowance and a travel grant);

Activity 8: Supporting the participation of young researchers in the international exchange of knowledge for 3-21 days (eligible expenses are the participation fee, travel expenses, living allowance, etc.)

 The SPINNO Programme (2007-2013) was launched by MEAC to promote cooperation between R&D institutions and enterprises. It also supports knowledge- and technology transfer in Estonian research institutions. The programme is co-financed by the European Union Structural Funds through Enterprise Estonia . The total budget was EUR 7.7 million.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Gender equality in public research in Estonia falls under the Gender Equality Act (adopted in 2004, latest amendments in 2013), which promotes policies addressing gender balance and encourages the State, local governments, agencies, educational and research institutions, and private companies to support gender equality. However, the Estonian Government has not introduced specific gender quotas in support of gender equality either in the public or in the private sector. Excellence remains the main criterion for researchers to receive funding and to participate in decision-making bodies. Gender equality in the research sector is not a sensitive issue in Estonia because of gender balance which is already satisfactory: there is almost the same number of women (49 %) and men (51 %) among researchers and engineers. However, in the Estonian Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2014-2020 'Knowledge-based Estonia', the one goal is to pay more attention to guarantee equal opportunities in terms of gender, including positions, grant decisions and steering committees.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Estonia did not indicate any existing support to national policies on gender equality in public research.

Even though a proactive gender equality research policy is missing in Estonia, female researchers are paid by the State during maternity leave. Since 2007, fathers have had the right to receive a 'parental benefit' once the child is seventy days old. However, if a researcher is part of a project team and the project ends during the parental leave, it is up to the host institution to find an available research position in which to employ the researcher. Additionally, there are some opportunities in financing system that support equal possibilities for women to apply for a grant. When awarding grants, periods when a person is on parental leave are taken into account when analysing the eligibility criteria as part of the  total number of years after obtaining a PhD degree. For men, the time spent under military duty is also taken into consideration. There are also special measures for post-doctorate grants of ERMOS and Mobilitas, when the State is ready to support the holder of the grant also after the nominal time is ended, if the grant actions are not fulfilled or stopped for certain reasons like having a child.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 11.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

In terms of funding of initiatives on gender equality, the programme 'Advancing Gender Equality 2011-2013' was introduced and is still ongoing.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 75.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Regarding gender balance in public research decision making, the Estonian Government has not introduced any specific gender quotas.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 27.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 15 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Estonia is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the legal basis ensuring open access and preservation of scientific information is set up in the Organisation of Research and Development Act under conditions for institutional and personal research funding (relevant amendments to the act in force since 2012), which state free access to the results of publicly-funded research. In the framework of the main research funding instruments, the conditions/requirements for open access are therefore set up and the open access policy is in place. It requires researchers to publish in open access; both the green and gold open access models are supported.

According to the regulations on institutional research funding (Estonian Ministry of Education and Research) and personal research funding (Estonian Research Council), any publication arising from supported research project or research grant is required to be deposited into the Estonian Research Information System (ETIS). The researchers are responsible for providing the publication metadata (i.e. journal name, title, author list, volume, issue, page numbers etc.) and an appropriate copy of the publication immediately. Self-archiving of the full texts of publications is mandatory but access can be restricted for internal use until the end of the publisher’s embargo. Impact factors of journals are not taken into account when evaluating research output of research institutions or individual researchers. The open access policy has therefore no direct impact on the researcher's career. Through the number of citations and H-factors, the impact of publications is however indirectly taken into account when evaluating applications.

Related to publications, access to scientific information is not a problem for Estonian scientists as the Consortium of Estonian Libraries Network (established in 1996, statute renewed in 2011) and the research libraries have created very good conditions and access to scientific journals and electronic databases for national researchers, which is probably why Estonian researchers do not feel the need for specific open access policies. In addition, the current research funding conditions favour publishing in journals with a high impact, but they are not usually open access journals.

The length of embargo depends on publisher and publication channels, and is currently not set by the funder. The academic freedom to choose appropriate publication channels is acknowledged, so there is no pressure to publish in so called Gold Open Access journals.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 96.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 20.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, there is no specific policy, except for the Programme of Electronic Scientific Information (launched in 2009), which aims to supply the Estonian R&D institutions with scientific information and to acquire access to the scientific information and electronic publications for the Estonian research libraries and organisations. The programme period is 2010-2014. There are some plans to take into account open access to data, but it is not yet included as a criterion in the funding decisions and evaluations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 43.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The Estonian e-repository programme (launched in 2011) is an integrated e-environment created for long-term preservation and availability of digitised resources of the Estonian cultural heritage institutions: libraries, archives and museums. The e-repository enables to link national heritage collections with the pan-European library EUROPEANA.

The Estonian Research Information System (ETIS; established in 2006) is developed in a way that would allow it to be used as an open repository, so that the results of research receiving public funding are easily identifiable by appropriate technical means, including through meta-data attached to electronic versions of the research output.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Estonia has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. The RDI Strategy 2007-2013 'Knowledge-Based Estonia' and Estonian Strategy for Competitiveness 'Estonia 2020' (launched in 2010) has given the framework for fostering open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. With the support of the Enterprise Estonia Foundation, specific attention has been paid creating technology transfer capacity in universities.

Technology transfer is encouraged including the patenting of information into the evaluation and funding of the universities. The basic funding of research institutions is therefore based on performance indicators, also taking into account indicators for knowledge transfer, patent applications, patents and contract research.

A number of measures to facilitate the partnerships and productive interactions between research institutions and the private sector have been implemented since 2008-2009. Counselling on measures is also provided in county development centres. The following measures are funded by MEAC and implemented by the Enterprise Estonia Foundation:

-           Cluster development programme;

-           Knowledge and technology transfer baseline funding (SPINNO Programme);

-           Programme 'Start-up Estonia' for new innovative enterprises.

For the next programming period, two strategies have been prepared in parallel, to ensure a coherent R&D policy. In October 2013, the new Entrepreneurship Growth Strategy 2014-2020 was launched, and in January 2014, the new RDI strategy for 2014-2020. Both focus even more on the co-operation between enterprises and R&D institutions.

Through technology transfer capacities in universities and county development centres, funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the strategy.

Strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are not supported by funding organisations in Estonia.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 83 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Estonia who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of the Digital European Research Area (ERA), Estonia has not set up any strategy. However, on 1 May 2013, the Tiger Leap Foundation, the Estonian Education and Research Network and the Estonian Information Technology Foundation merged with the 'Estonian Information Technology Foundation for Education' (HITSA). The mission of HITSA is to provide a high-quality national network infrastructure for Estonia’s research, educational and cultural communities. Its services include a permanent Internet connection, as well as webhosting, an e-mail, consultations in the event of security problems, etc.

In addition, the 'Estonian higher education information and communications technology and R&D activities State programme 2011-2015' is a cooperation programme implemented by HITSA, between universities, the information and communication technology (ICT) sector and the State aimed at raising the quality of ICT and developing cooperation between different partners.

Concerning digital services, Estonia provides Cloud services and Premium services (Consultancy, NREN service implementation support, and others). Access to digital research services is possible via 'E-teadusinfo' (launched in 2009) and access to publications is possible in all public libraries by using usernames and passwords. EENet is the Estonian National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of research and education communities within the country.

From a more general point of view, e-identity systems are very well developed in Estonia; identification is ensured through the ID card and it is quite widely applied.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

EENet is the Estonian National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. Since 2013, EENet has become part of the HITSA. Functioning via EENet, the Estonian Academic Authentication and Authorization Infrastructure (TAAT) enables electronic identities (user accounts) issued by education or research institutions to be used to access several web-based services. In June 2013, the policy document of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GEANT (GN3plus) Partner federations, was signed by EENet on behalf of TAAT and Estonia became a partner of eduGAIN.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Estonia, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 16 research performing organisations in Estonia answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 60.3% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Estonia shows that 20.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 66.7 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 13.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 88.1 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 10.0 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.9 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Reform of national funding schemes || 2012 || X ||

Conditions and Procedure for Evaluation of Research and Development Institutions || 2009 || ||

The Research and Development Organisation Act - amended in 1997, 2009 and 2012 || 1995 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Conditions and procedure for applying for, awarding and amending the amount of institutional research funding || 2011 || ||

Quality Agreement of Estonian Universities || 2011 || ||

Personal Research Funding || 2012 || X ||

Improving the competitiveness of Estonian R&D through the research programmes and modernisation of higher education and R&D institutions || 2007 || ||

New RDI Strategy (“Knowledge-based Estonia”) for 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Organisation of Research and Development Act (last amendment in 2012) || 1997 || ||

Research and Innovation Policy Monitoring Programme 2011-2015 (TIPS Programme) || || ||

Information Technology Foundation for Education || 2013 || X || X

Organisation of Research and Development Act - amendment 1997 and 2009 || 1995 || ||

Detailed conditions and procedure for applying for, conducting and approving the result of regular evaluation of research and development || 2012 || X ||

Implementing joint research agendas

The Programme for the Internationalisation of Science || 2011 || ||

Implementation Plan for achieving the objectives of Estonian Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2007-2013 “Knowledge-based Estonia” in 2012-2013 || 2011 || ||

Swiss-Estonian Research Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 || 2009 || ||

Nordplus Programme || 2012 || X ||

Centres of Excellence Programme || 2012 || X ||

Norwegian-Estonian Research Cooperation Programme for 2009-2014 || 2009 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap 2010 (to be updated in 2014) || 2010 || ||

Attractive careers

Universities Act || 2012 || X ||

Programme for Cooperation and Innovation between Higher Education Establishments || 2012 || X ||

Programme Mobilitas || 2008 || ||

The conditions of and procedure for the election of academic research professors || 2002 || ||

Agreement on Good Practice in the Internationalisation of Estonia’s Higher Education Institutions || 2007 || ||

Programme ERMOS || 2010 || ||

Aliens Act (amended 2013) || 1996 || ||

EURAXESS Service Centres - Agreement of good practice || || ||

Standard of Higher Education (amendment in 2012) || 2008 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Gender Equality Act  - amended in 2012 || 2004 || ||

Programme “Advancing Gender Equality" || 2011 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Organisation of Research and Development Act || 2012 || X ||

Estonian e-repository programme || 2011 || ||

Principles for the preparation of a uniform collection plan for research libraries and the procedure for application for financing the acquisition of research information for research libraries, for the review of applications and for making financing || 2012 || X ||

The Programme of Electronic Scientific Information || 2009 || ||

Innovation voucher grant  || 2009 || ||

Estonian Research Information System || 2006 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Programme "Start-up Eesti" || 2011 || ||

Knowledge and technology transfer baseline funding (SPINNO Programme) || 2008 || ||

Cluster development || 2009 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Consortium of Estonian Libraries Network (statute renewed in 2011) || 1996 || ||

State Program 2011-2015 on higher education information and communication technology and research and development activities || 2011 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

E-teadusinfo || 2009 || ||

eduGAIN (Membership) || 2013 || X || X

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation (R&I) policies are the responsibility of the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT), a policy design and implementation agency, and the National Council of Research and Technology (NCRT).

The Ministry of Education, Life Long Learning and Religious Affairs is the main R&D policy body. Within the Ministry, the design and implementation of the research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policy is carried out by the GSRT that is also responsible for supporting, supervising and financing the research activities of research institutes and of its productive industry, of representing the country within the European Union, promoting cooperation in the areas of research and technology, and monitoring the national research institutions. The GSRT is also the main research funding organisation in Greece.

NCRT is the supreme State body for formulating and implementing the national policy for research, technology and innovation. NCRT proposes main R&D guidelines in the area of research and technology, assesses candidacies for directorship appointments in national research organisations, gives opinions to the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs on the selection of directors in national research organisations, as well as on issues raised by the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

An Innovation Council was created in December 2013.

The NDC is the national organisation for the documentation, information and support in the areas of research, science and technology. Notably, the centre is responsible for creating and  disseminating Greek scientific databases online, structuring and disseminating the National Archive of PhD theses, developing and providing software for the electronic operation of national libraries and their web links with Greek and international scientific databases and creating a Library Network.

The R&I policy is planned for a period of seven years following the cycle of the European Structural Funds. Universities are key players followed by research centres, and the business sector plays a limited role.

Greece’s research and technology system is centralised and dominated by the public sector in terms of funding and performance.

The responsibility of funding research is divided between the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs and the Ministry of Development and Competitiveness, the latter having the overall responsibility for supporting regional development in general, including entrepreneurship and partly (recently) innovation. The Ministry of Development and Competitiveness is currently managing the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF), which is the main funding source for R&I. Funds coming from the Regional Operational Programmes is typically under the responsibility of the Regional Councils.

Frequent changes in research, development and innovation (RDI) legislation indicates a weak governance. Yet another RDI law is about to be released following a public consultation in December 2013, aimed at addressing existing weaknesses. The law defines the bodies that will be responsible for designing the new RTDI strategy and establishing a new department within the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs for designing and monitoring actions related to the national RTDI strategy and its implementation and coordination. Also, a new simplified administrative management system is foreseen in the period 2014-2020.

In 2007, the country adopted a national strategy for R&I, following the Structural Fund programming cycle 2007-2013. It is described in the ‘Strategic Development Plan for Research, Technology and Innovation’ (SDP) and the operational programme (OP) ‘Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship’. Further to a consultation process in 2012 the GSRT and the National Council are elaborating the new National Strategic Framework for Research, Technological Development and Innovation that would run up to 2020.

The GSRT is developing a new National Strategy for Research and Innovation, that will build on the competitive advantage of Greece in certain research areas at European and international level and will try to maximise its potential, through R&D investment on strategic, national priority areas, and will foster innovation and entrepreneurship.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Greece represented EUR 66 per inhabitant in 2012, less than half the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant declined slightly (EUR 64). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period after the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Greece is higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Greece, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved negatively, but less negatively than the evolution observed at EU-27 level. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Greece than the regression observed in the EU-28.

Most of the government funding in 2012 was directed to the higher education sector (EUR 377.3 million) and to public research organisations (EUR 257.3 million). Funding from the BES (Business Enterprise Sector) was at EUR 414.8 million at the end of 2012, compared to EUR 455.5 million at the end of 2011 (8.9 % decrease). In the same period, funding from higher education institutions (HEIs) decreased by 17 %.

A significant feature of the Greek national R&D system is the high share of funding from abroad amounting to about 16% of GERD (2012). This funding comes from the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and Structural Funds, the former contributing slightly more than the latter.

The main bulk in research takes place within the higher education sector.

There has been a systematic increase of competitive funding compared to block funding. All competitive research programmes are supported by the EU Structural Funds.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The GSRT manages the project-based funding. One of its units, namely the 'Special Service for Coordination and Implementation of R&D and Innovation measures', issues the calls for proposals and evaluates them.

Law 3777/2009 (art.18), amending Presidential Decree 274/2000 on 'Terms, conditions and process of funding (subsidy or aid) of projects and programmes submitted by industrial or other production units' set the principles for competitive funding.

Competitive funding in the programming period 2007-2013 was channelled by the NSRF, which is co-financed by the Structural Funds. The two concrete instruments for project funding are the following:

•           Research programmes: Heraclitus II funding PhDs (total budget EUR 39.6 million); Thales funding research networks (total budget EUR 120 million); Archimedes III focusing on TEIs (total budget EUR 21 million), post-doctorate research (EUR 30 million) and research projects implemented by a primary investigator (EUR 60 million); Collaboration supports collaborative research by private companies and public research organisations (EUR 229 million); ‘Support for R&D in groups of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’ finance research projects implemented by groups of SMEs collaborated with public research organisations, technology transfer organisations and technology suppliers (EUR 23.7 million); ‘Support for R&D in new firms’ finance small to medium research projects implemented by new companies with subcontracting to public research organisations  (EUR 11.3 million).

•           Research networks: includes the support of the existing Innovation Poles and the creation of new ones, the Innovation Zone in Thessaloniki and the research funding within the Microelectronics Cluster ‘Corallia’ (EUR 33 million).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 75.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are applied by all research funding institutions in Greece. These principles are excellence, impartiality, transparency, appropriateness for purpose, efficiency and speed.

Research proposals and the assessment of the research programs are evaluated using the peer review system by the GSRT. The evaluators are scientists selected either from an official registry or the ‘Web of Science’. All non-block funding is distributed via calls for proposals from the GSRT and all these calls are competitive and evaluated by national and international experts. The beneficiaries are selected on the basis of the ranking after the evaluation.

The new research, development and innovation (RD&I) law proposes new evaluation methods for research organisations.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding for Higher Education Institutions is not systematically allocated based on an institutional assessment. It is mostly based on an algorithm that takes into consideration quantitative aspects, such as the number of HEIs and Research Organisations (Ros) students. There are no laws or soft law measures requiring that institutional funding is allocated on a competitive basis. There is also no information available regarding the percentage of institutional funding allocated on a competitive basis.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Greece who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding .

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Common research agendas are mainly driven by EU-supported schemes. Greek research teams participate extensively in several EU initiatives and often play an important role in research agendas for grand challenges. Policy actions supporting joint activities are implemented in the context of INCOERAnets.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Greece allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Greece dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Greece in total participation is 3.2 % and the country received 2.5 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 83 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013.

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in five of the 10 on-going initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe, Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Water Challenges for a Changing world, and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives:  EMPIR, Eurostars2. In addition, Greece would like to join AAL2.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 54 ERA-NETs, of which 20 are currently still running. The country has also participated in two ERA-NET Plus actions, of which one is still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint calls for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Greece has bilateral agreements, notably with France, Israel, Germany, Turkey and Cyprus.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Greece has bilateral agreements with China and Israel.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Greece allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Greece has policies in place to facilitate the cross-border interoperability of national programmes. Foreign natural and legal persons are eligible to perform projects, carry out studies and implement programs and actions to promote research, technological development and innovation in Greece. The funding conditions and procedures are defined on an ad-hoc basis by a Presidential Decree prepared with the help of the GSRT.

A mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported in Greece by Law 3653/2008, notably  in ERANETsplus, EUREKA and other activities coordinated by the EC. There are provisions to ensure the mutual recognition of evaluation results in all the bilateral agreements that Greece has with MS and Associated Countries.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 98.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Greece allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

EL participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RIs): Europeean Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), and European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). In 2012, the country contributed 2.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL, the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 25 of them.

In terms of financial commitments to developing these RIs, Greece is committed to fund 14 of them. They are: CESSDA, CLARIN, DARIAH,  SHARE-ERIC, EMSO, EURO ARGO, LIFEWATCH, HIPER, BBMRI, EATRIS, INFRAFRONTIER, ELI, KM3NeT, PRACE (ex HPC).

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Greece is involved in four of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate establishing and operating Ris of European interest involving several European countries. Greece is member of SHARE-ERIC, CLARIN ERIC, EURO-ARGO ERIC and BBMRI-ERIC.

Greece has a national strategy of RIs that addresses the need for upgrading the existing infrastructures and identifying new ones.

In 2013, GSRT launched a call for creating a National Roadmap of Research Infrastructures, that includes identifying RIs of national interest and ESFRI projects. The process is expected to be concluded in 2014. Financial commitments are expected to be formulated soon after.

The annual budget allocated to Ris of pan-European interest is EUR 310.5 million, whereas the allocation to ESFRI-related roadmaps is EUR 27.87 million (XFEL EUR 4 million; DARIAH, BBMRI and EATRIS EUR 5.7 million; CESSDA EUR 0.87 million; EMSO EUR 3.7 million; EURO-ARGO EUR 0.8 million; INFRAFRONTIER EUR 3.9 million; PRACE EUR 3.5 million; LIFEWATCH EUR 3.7 million; HIPER EUR 2 million and ELI EUR 3.4 million).

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by Greece, access to 14 of them has been funded by the European Commission.

Financial support is provided for inward cross-border access to RI through the programme 'Career offer to Greek-speaking researchers from abroad' that gives grants to foreigner Greek speakers, and through the programme for incorporating foreign PhD researchers into the Greek RTD system. In addition, Law 2004/2011 enables national researchers to take a sabbatical leave for up to three years to participate in research projects abroad. An estimated 10 % of researchers make use of this opportunity.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Greece in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Greece Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 24 674 FTE researchers in Greece in 2011. This represents 5.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 80.7 in Greece compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 45 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

In Greece, the major remaining barrier to the openness and transparency of the recruitment system is the language. Until recently, higher education institutions published job vacancies only in Greek and on their own websites without making use of the EURAXESS Jobs portal. Language is an issue not just because of publishing vacancies in English but also because in the universities, knowledge of the Greek language is compulsory (in research institutes it is not always the case). However, thanks to the efforts of EURAXESS-GR, with the help of the General Secretariat for Research and Technology, there has been a great improvement within the last two years

   4.3.   Attractive careers

In October 2010, the 65th Rectors’ Assembly unanimously adopted the ‘Charter & Code’ encouraging all Greek higher education institutions to sign it and recognise it as the tool to promote their human resource strategies. The Law 4009/2011 strongly promotes the ‘Charter and Code’ principles on excellence and innovation. In practice, eight Universities (University of Crete, University of Ioannina, University of Thessaly, University of Macedonia, University of Patras, University of the Aegean, the International Hellenic University and the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki), the Greek Rectors’ Conference, two Research Centres (the National Hellenic Research Foundation and the Centre for Research and Technology Hellas) as well as the Euroscience Association and the Marie Curie Fellows Association have already signed and are currently implementing the ‘Charter & Code’ principles.

By May 2014, 9 organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 2 had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The planned new Law for Research, Technology and Innovation develops mechanisms for the career development of researchers, and especially, women.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.1 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

Higher education institutions have the possibility to increase the quality of doctoral training trough collaboration with national and international higher education and research institutions (Part IV of Law 4009/2011). Some PhD programmes explicitly follow the ‘Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training’ while many comply implicitly with some of the seven principles.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

Data on the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of other countries is not available.

In November 2012, the Ministry for Education, Religious Affairs, Culture and Sports launched a call for Higher Education Institutions in Greece for a pilot programme for the mobility of young researchers of the Mediterranean Office for Youth (MOY). The Programme aims to develop joint higher educational programmes, with the participation of at least two higher education institutions from participating countries, at a postgraduate or a doctorate level, and is expected to enhance transnational mobility. Inward mobility remains limited, while the system is in principle open. Both Greek and foreign researchers employed in higher education institutions and research institutions abroad can apply for a researcher’s position within a Greek institution. The Greek language constitutes a barrier for inward mobility of researchers.

Under Presidential Degree 274/2000 and Law 3777/2009, close collaboration between the universities and the private sector is encouraged. Researchers from public research centres can be recruited by private companies under specific agreements decided by the Research Centre’s Administrative Board. Distinguished scientists employed in the business or public sector can be called upon by national research centres to conduct a specific research project or cooperate on a partial employment basis. The Innovation Vouchers for SMEs scheme fosters exchange of expertise and consultant services between ‘innovation agents’ (i.e. universities, research centres) and companies. It targets SMEs active in the manufacturing sector, software industry and research and development firms and public laboratories of universities, technological colleges, research centres and institutes, sectoral companies as suppliers of services of high added value and knowledge intensity. In spite of these measures, better translation of the scientific research strengths into marketable goods and services remains a key policy challenge. Efforts are also needed to foster technology transfer and address bureaucratic obstacles.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Greece has specific gender provisions in the field of public research.

The National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013, adopted in 2010, aims to create a legal framework for providing equal opportunities to women in the workplace and in life. The programme acknowledged amendments to legislation, while specific project actions were undertaken by the General Secretariat of Gender Equality and interventions in other Ministries and public authorities. There are no explicit policies by funding agencies to foster cultural and institutional change on gender .

In 2006, GSRT created the Periktioni network for women researchers and scientists in Greece and the whole Mediterranean, Balkan and Black Sea region.

The National Documentation Centre (NDC), within the National Hellenic Research Foundation (NHRF),  participates in GENDERA (Gender Debate in the European Research Area) and SHEMERA (Euro-Mediterranean research cooperation on gender and science) and has developed a database of good practice for equal opportunities of genders in research (practices related to recruitment, selection and promotion).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013, adopted in 2010, aims to create a legal framework to provide equal opportunities to women in the workplace and in life. The programme acknowledged amendments to legislation, while specific project actions were undertaken by the General Secretariat of Gender Equality and interventions in other Ministries and public authorities.

By law, Greece supports women returning to the same position after parental leave. However, female researchers are entitled to maternity leave only if they have signed a contract with a research institution.

Law 2839/2000 introduced provisions for a balanced participation of men and women in the Public Sector, Public and Private Law entities, as well as in municipalities. Law 3653/2008 addressed gender imbalances in the decision-making process in the research sector for the recruitment from National Bodies, Research and Technology Committees, provided that the candidates have the same qualifications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

There are no specific initiatives or funding to strengthen the gender dimension in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Greece who responded to the survey indicated no specific support to gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, the country has set up quotas for the under-represented sex to participate in decision-making bodies of Research Performing Organisations.

Gender equality is encouraged in the research profession by guaranteeing female representation in all top-level positions and decision-making bodies in a ratio of at least one-third (based on Article 16 of the Greek Constitution and Law 3653/2008 Article 57). However, the number of women researchers, in particular in senior positions, is limited.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 14 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 50 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Greece is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, since 2013 the GSRT was appointed national point for open access matters and has the mandate to elaborate a national policy framework for open access to scientific publications and research data, on the preservation and re-use of scientific information, and its implementation and monitoring on related e-infrastructures. The institution set up a working group to provide input to harmonise and implement open access in Greece. Open access will be made mandatory for scientific publications resulting from publicly funded research. Relevant changes to the legislative framework of funding terms are in progress.

The National Documentation Centre (NDC), within the NHRF, actively encourages open access. Two Greek institutions have an explicit open access mandate (Panteion University and Archimedes Centre for Modeling, Analysis and Computation at the University of Crete).

The NDC project Mediterranean Open Access Network (ΜΕDOANET) is meant to enhance existing strategies and structures for open access and contribute towards implementing new ones in six Mediterranean countries, namely Greece, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal and Turkey.

The national research strategy of the new programming period, currently being developed, will place emphasis on open access, especially in the context of digital agenda.

Related to open access to publications, the majority of open access papers in Greece in the period 2008-2011 were green and hybrid (452 papers, almost 80 % of total open access papers).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the current EC-funded project RECODE will provide policy recommendations for open access to research data in Europe.

There are 19 research data repositories.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, there are 27 open access repositories in Greece, in 10 Universities, two research organisations, the NDC and the Hellenic Managing Authority of the Operational Programme 'Education and Lifelong Learning'.

Five of the Greek open access repositories are OpenAIRE.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Greece has not developed a specific knowledge transfer strategy. However, it fosters open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations through various measures.

The Presidential Degree 274/2000 and Law 3777/2009 encourage collaboration between universities and the private sector. Researchers from public research centres can be recruited by private companies and vice versa.

The NDC/NHRF and the PRAXI-Network which is supervised by the Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (FORTH,  supervised by GSRT) supports the development of research collaborations and exploitation of results between the public and private sectors.

Initiatives to encourage the collaboration between industry and academia are performed mainly through bilateral cooperation programmes. In the last years new programmes have been established: the Hellenic Mobile Clusters Programme (2007-2013), the Cooperation 2011 Programme, the Creation Programme (2007-2013), Innovation Vouchers for SMEs (2009-2015), Collaboration (-2015), and a scheme to support business with the employment of highly-qualified scientific personnel under the Human Resources Development operational programme (2007-2013).

In 2012, competitive calls were announced, focusing on developing human capital for research in a knowledge economy (including support to excellent researchers, researcher mobility towards enterprises and for training innovation activities), with a total financing in excess of EUR 150 million for the period 2011-2013.

In addition to direct support measures, developing an entrepreneurial and innovation-friendly culture in the higher education sector will facilitate collaboration. To this end, EUR 101 million were budgeted for developing offices in universities and Technical Education Institutions that combine career development counselling activities with promoting business planning competitions, creating entrepreneurship clubs and developing courses on entrepreneurship. The 2011 law for HEIs recognises these offices and gives them the status of ‘Innovation and Liaison Offices’, which are also responsible for Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 98.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Greece who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is equal to 0 .

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Greece has not set up a strategy for its implementation, but the national research strategy of the new programming period will place emphasis on open access, in the context of the digital agenda. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.

GRNet is the Greek National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, and collaboration support.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 50 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Greece was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is a member of eduGAIN through GRNet, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and autorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations.

There is no national policy on e-identity.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 40.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Greece, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 22 research performing organisations in Greece answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 15.3% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Greece shows that 30.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 60.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 10.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 46.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 53.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.2 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

One major research performing organisation and some major research performing organisations have not responded to the survey, which explains the low percentages for some of the indicators.

For the indicator 'Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations', it should be noted that major universities and research centers have not responded to the survey.

For the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations', it should be noted that major research performing organisations, that tend to publish a lot, did not respond to the survey.

For the indicators 'Share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities' and 'Share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities', it should be noted that the shares would have been higher if more technical universities and research centers had answered to the survey.

For the indicator 'Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector', the share is 0% and this is in part due to the legal framework in place.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

A legislative act  on the elaboration of the restructuring of the research system and creation of a flexible organization structure for research and technology organizations (ongoing) || || ||

New administrative management system on RDI for the new programming period 2014-2020 (in preparation) Structural Funds || || ||

Strategic Development Plan for Research, Technology and Innovation under the 2007-2013 National Strategic Reference Programme || 2007 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Presidential Decree 274/2000 on “Terms, conditions and process of funding (subsidy or aid) of projects and programs submitted by industrial or other production units”, as amended by Law 3777/2009, Article 18 “Amendment of Presidential Decree 274/2000” ( t || 2009 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

New bilateral R&D agreements (on-going) || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Roadmap of Research Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X

National strategy for research infrastructures (on-going) || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Support of Postdoctoral Researchers || 2010 || ||

New measures within the new programming period 2014-2020 || || ||

Attractive careers

Euraxess in Greece || || ||

Call for Request for Proposals for participation in the Pilot Programme for the mobility of young researchers of the Mediterranean Office for Youth (MOY) . || 2012 || X ||

Law 4009/2011 -Structure, operation, quality assurance of academic studies and internationalisation of HEIs || 2011 || ||

Specific Actions in the framework of the NSRF (2007-2013) || 2007 || ||

Presidential Degree 128/2008  Adaptation of Greek Legislation to Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of conducting scientific research. || 2008 || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

PD176/1997, Measures for the enhancement of security and health of pregnant women and new mothers  in the workplace, in accordance with 92/85/EC || 1997 || ||

Law 2839/2000, Provisions related to issues of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Public Administration and Decentralisation and other provisions || 2000 || ||

Law 3488/2006, Implementation of the principle of equal treatment of men and women in their access to employment, professional training and promotion, in employment terms and conditions and other related provisions || 2006 || ||

Law 3996/2011, Reform of the labor inspectorate, arrangements for social security and other provisions || 2011 || ||

National Programme for Gender Equality 2010-2013 || 2010 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Periktioni network for women researchers and scientists in Greece and the whole Mediterranean, Balkan and Black Sea region || 2006 || ||

 Law 3653/2008 (article 57) || 2008 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

National strategy for Research and Innovation in the new programming period 2014-2020 supports OA in the context of the digital agenda || 2014 || X || X

NDC hosted a workshop on National Policies for Open Access in the context of Mediterranean Open Access Network (MEDOANET) || 2012 || X ||

Greece signed the Alhambra Declaration for the enhancement of open access policies through the creation of national task force committees. || 2010 || ||

RECODE - Policy RECommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe || 2013 || X || X

New measures to support research and innovation activities || 2014 || X || X

Operational Program for Research and Innovation in the new programming period 2014-2020 (Structural Funds) || || ||

National policy framework for open access to scientific publications and research data, on preservation and re-use of scientific information, and their implementation and monitoring on related e-infrastructures (on-going) || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Hellenic Mobile Cluster Programme || 2013 || X || X

PAVET 2013 in the framework of NSRF (2007-2013) || 2013 || X || X

Action “Supporting enterprises for recruiting high level scientific personnel” || || ||

New measures to support enterprises in the new programming period 2014-2020 || 2013 || X || X

Clusters Programme (Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship Operational Programme- 2007-2013) || || ||

COOPERATION 2011 – Partnerships between businesses and research bodies in specific research and technological sectors (on-going) || || ||

Innovation Vouchers for SMEs (2009-2015) || 2009 || ||

CREATION – Support to new innovative (notably highly knowledge-intensive) enterprises  (spin-offs and spin-outs) (2007-2013) || 2007 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Greek Open Knowledge Foundation Network (OKFN) || 2013 || X || X

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation (R&I) policies are mainly the responsibility of the Ministry of Economics and Competitiveness (MINECO). The MINECO, assisted by the State Secretary for Research, Development and Innovation (SSRDI), is responsible for drafting and managing the main research, development and innovation (RDI) instruments: the multiannual 'strategies' and 'plans'. MINECO allocated 76.7% of the Spanish State Budget on RDI and innovation in 2013,  considerably increasing its share (68.9% in 2012).

The Executive Committee for Science, Technology and Innovation policy (CDCTI) is an inter-ministerial body responsible for the planning, evaluating and coordinating of the main Spanish instruments for RDI 'plans' and gathers all Ministries with RDI responsibilities.

Two main consultative bodies support the design and implementation of the RDI strategies and plans: the Council of Science, Technology and Innovation (CPCTI) in charge of the coordination with regional governments and other actors in the research and development (R&D) system; and the Advisory Council of Science, technology and Innovation (CACTI) that represents the research community, enterprises and trade-unions.

The main funding bodies involved in the implementation of RDI policies are: the Spanish Research Agency (to be created), which will be an autonomous entity that will assign R&D funds on scientific merit grounds; and the Centre for Industrial Technological Development (CDTI), which is a public corporate entity mainly promoting innovation and technological development for companies. Other institutions, such as the Carlos III Health Institute (ISCIII) also fund research.

Other institutions complete the R&D Spanish landscape: the Information system of Science, Technology and Innovation (SICTI), responsible for the data collection and analysis for the monitoring of all policy programmes and instruments of the RDI policy; and the Committee of Ethics in Research, an advisory body on ethics of research and technology.

The Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), one of the most important research performers of the country, with about the 15%of the national scientific production from 2003 to 2011, has suffered large budget cuts from the government. 

Spain has a quasi-federal political system and its RDI-related policies are decentralised to the regions. In the past, most regions developed similar R&D plans and launched similar and often overlapping instruments, programmes and agencies. Some recent developments, and in particular two new institutions, aim to improve the coordination of national and regional RDI policies: the above-mentioned Council of Science, Technology and Innovation (CPCTI) and the Spanish Research Agency, both foreseen in the 2011 Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI). 

The main RDI policy instruments are the Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) and the Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016). The strategies are multiannual schemes that set the rationale, objectives and indicators. The plan implements the strategies setting its priorities, programmes, coordination mechanisms, costs and sources of funding.

The implementation of the new policy framework is suffering from delays in important policy R&D programmes (e.g. call for proposals of the R&D plan on fundamental research projects 'Promotion of R&D and Innovation towards societal challenges and Research Training (FPI)'), significant reductions (e.g. Research Training – FPI and FPU – with a reduction of 200 grants) and cancellations.

Spain adopted a national strategy for R&I in 2013 for 2013-2020. The strategy sets the rationale, objectives and indicators of the Spanish R&D and innovation policy.  The Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016) is a multiannual plan that implements the EESTI by setting its priorities, programmes, coordination mechanisms, costs and sources of funding.

The most significant changes introduced by the strategy are an increased emphasis on innovation, public-private R&D collaboration, research excellence and other emerging topics, such as promoting RDI on societal challenges or the role of public procurement  to promote R&D and innovation. The new strategy provides sets of indicators to measure the impact of RDI policy.

The strategy and the plan recognise the importance of increasing the role of private investments in R&D, but they do not set a specific target of Business Enterprise Research and Development (BERD)/Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) or BERD/gross domestic product (GDP).

The plan implementing the strategy gives special attention to the European Research Area (ERA) and in particular to the promotion of: (a) excellent basic research; (b) technological, industrial and firm leadership; and (c) scientific and technical R&I capabilities on grand challenges.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Spain represented EUR 132 per inhabitant in 2012, below the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.3 % of total government expenditures and 0.6 % of GDP (Eurostat).

In 2013 there was a reduction of  approximately EUR 460 million in the budget. The budget for 2014 envisages an increase of EUR 213.9 million (3,61 %).

Important public budget cuts have seriously affected national and regional budgets for RDI and public R&D investments went back to the levels of 2005-2006. In the last few years the share of loans has increased in contrast to that of subsidies, which implies, de facto, an even greater decrease.

The cuts indicate that it will be very difficult for Spain to reach the target of 3 % GERD per GDP set by the Europe 2020 strategy. Consequently, the new Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) has set a new lower target of 2 % GERD per GDP for 2020.

Four regions accounted in 2012 for 69.7 % of all R&D expenditures: Madrid (25.6 %), Catalonia (22.3 %), Andalusia (11.1 %) and the Basque Country (10.7 %). In relative terms, the leading regions are the Basque Country, Navarre, Madrid and Catalonia with a GERD by GDP of 2.2 %; 1.9 %, 1.8 % and 1.5 % respectively. The Basque Country is the only region that has increased its yearly R&D Intensity over the last three years (2 %, 2.1 % and 2.2 %).

The Spanish system of tax incentives (indirect government funding through three types of R&D tax incentives for firms) for RDI has been one of the most generous among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries for the past few years. However, the bureaucratic procedure for benefitting from these deductions was until recently complex and uncertain.

The percentage of Structural Funds devoted to RDI is increasing. The percentage of these funds devoted to R&D rose from 14 % (EUR 3 810 million) in 2000–2006 to 31 % (EUR 6 641 million) in the period 2007–2013. The Spanish participation in the EU Framework Programme (FP) is of around 8.3 % and Spain aims to increase it to 9 %.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Competitive project funding through public tenders gained importance in the last years. The provisional budget for RDI distributed by the State Secretary of Research Development and Innovation for 2013 was EUR 3 864.2 million, of which 72.3 % was distributed through low interest credits and 27.7 % through subsidies (MINECO, 2013).  The PECTI states that most of the funds will be distributed through competitive funding mechanisms.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 64.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review to be applied in Spain according to the PECTI are transparency, efficiency, and scientific quality.

The Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI) describes the core principles of international peer review, but it does not impose the use of peer review. Instead the LCTI states that the international standards of peer review are to be followed where appropriate.

The allocation of competitive funds usually follows the proposal peer-evaluation process, usually carried out by domestic experts. International peer evaluation is less frequent. The new strategy EESTI (2013-2020) includes international evaluation of competitive funding as one of its five basic principles (number three). In addition, one of its six articulation mechanisms (number 5) considers the ‘harmonisation of criteria and practices of evaluation – ex ante and ex post‘, including international peer review. The new PECTI (2013-2016), as it implements the Strategy, also aims to increase the role of competitive funding and ‘international peer review’.

The evaluation is performed by specific organs, which may include international evaluators, under the principles of independence, neutrality and specialisation, basing the analysis on the available scientific and technical knowledge.

The Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT) carried out yearly monitoring exercise of the R&D public calls for proposals from 2006-2012 and the CDTI evaluates most of the business-oriented instruments, and most reports are publicly available on the FECYT website.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional assessment is seldom allocated based on institutional assessment and most institutional funding is based on block funding. In addition, research institutions have a low level of autonomy to allocate funds.

Block funding is provided to public research organisations and to universities. Universities receive the salaries for the lectures that devote 66 % of their time to research and this amount can be considered as institutional funding. Public research organisations received in 2013 EUR 1 234.7 million (7.73 % lower than 2012), which accounted for 19.6 % of GBOARD.

There are some exceptions where institutional funds are allocated based on performance, like for instance, funding programmes concerning the procurement and grants for researchers. In addition, the University Strategy 2015 foresees performance-based funding. Concretely, it aims to define criteria for explicit resource allocation, primarily based on achieving measurable results in each of the key areas of university activities: teaching, research and technological development, and transfer of knowledge and innovation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives. Addressing societal challenges is receiving growing attention in Spain. The EESTI (2013-2020) and PECTI (2013-2016) follow the efforts of previous measures and increase their focus on promoting RDI within societal challenges. The EESTI includes the ‘promotion of RDI towards societal challenges’ as one of its four general objectives. The new PECTI gives special emphasis to its integration into the ERA and to the promotion of: a) excellent basic research; b) technological, industrial and firm leadership; and c) scientific and technical research and innovation capabilities on grand challenges.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Spain allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Spain dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the FP. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Spain in total participation is 9.4 % and the country received 7.8 % of total EC contributions. FP funding represents EUR 61 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4 % of the GERD for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in 10 of the 10 on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, the Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in four programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all four existing initiatives: AAL2, EDCTP2, EMPIR, Eurostars2.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular preparing and implementing joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 107 ERA-NETs, of which 33 are currently still running. The country also has participated in eight ERA-NET Plus actions, of which four are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Spain is currently involved in several EU-supported joint research agendas (Joint Programming Initiatives, Article 196/185; ERA-NETs; ERA-NET PLUS) and has issued joint calls with European countries involving several stakeholders addressing grand challenges.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, Spain has not developed a specific policy. In the context of its traditional relationship with Latin America, Spain has several cooperation programmes with this region. One of the most outstanding ones is the ‘Iber-American Programme of Science and Technology for Development.’ Moreover, the Spanish government has several general bilateral cooperation agreements with Third Countries, such as Canada, China, India, Korea, United States and Japan. Besides these general programmes, Spain also has bilateral cooperation programmes in some specific fields with Brazil (biotechnology, renewable energies, process engineering, nano technology and health) and Argentina (biomedical, forensic and vegetal genomics and bioinformatics). It is not known whether the country monitors the implementation of cooperation programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Spain allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is similar to the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is similar to the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing Joint Programmes are not specifically addressed by the EESTI in Spain.

However, some measures facilitate the interoperability. According to the Law of Science, Technology and Innovation, joint European measures in the field of intellectual property rights (IPR) are supported. The international programming website of the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness  also lists the open and closed joint calls.

Funding agencies do not implement Money follows Cooperation, a scheme which allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country.

Funding agencies do not implement Money follows Researchers, a scheme enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives.

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards is not systematically supported but often takes place in bilateral or multilateral programmes. Funders do not systematically apply the so called 'Lead agency' procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries.

Strategies and plans are increasingly based on some sort of evaluation analysis. Under the mandate of the MINECO, the FECYT carried out yearly evaluations of the R&D public calls for proposals from 2006-2010. Currently, the Ministry has decided to carry out evaluations with a longer time frame. The CDTI evaluates most of the business-oriented instruments, but these evaluations are not publically available for 2012-2013.

The new plan implementing the Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (PECTI) foresees increasing international peer review through programmes of support to R&D centres of excellence.

The ANECA (National Agency of Evaluation, Quality and Accreditation) is a national agency, which aims to monitor and evaluate the quality of the university system. According to its website, the agency has signed mutual recognition agreements with several international agencies, such as the ones from Austria, France, The Netherlands, Flanders, Poland, and Costa Rica.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 88.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Spain allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is lower than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Spain participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RI): the European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.5 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, EMBL,ESO, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participating in the development of Ris included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Spain participates in the preparatory phase of 38 of them (80 %). The country coordinates one of them: EU-SOLARIS .

In terms of financial commitment to developing these Ris, Spain is committed to funding 12 of them. They are: LIFEWATCH, IFMIF/EVEDA, EATRIS, ECRIN, ELIXIR,  INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, ESSneutrons, XFEL, ILL 20/20, PRACE (ex HPC).

With regards to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Spain is involved in two of the seven consortia, which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of Ris of European interest involving several European countries. Spain is member of ECRIN-ERIC and observer in EATRIS ERIC.

In terms of support for developing and implementing RIs, the EESTI considers the ‘sustainability and use of scientific and technological infrastructures’ as one of its specific objectives (sub-objective 2). And the PECTI follows the strategy and devotes one of its sub-programmes (number four) to research infrastructures.

The Spanish roadmap of Unique Scientific and Technological Infrastructures (ICTS) for national and regional RIs of pan-European interest was adopted in 2010 and provided an annual budget of  EUR 22 million for the 2010-2013 period.

At least three large ESFRI installations will be hosted in the country: the construction in Catalonia of one of the five supercomputers in Europe of the Partnership for Advanced Computing; the solar research infrastructure (EU-SOLARIS) at the Advanced Technological Centre for Renewable Energy in Almeria; and the European Spallation Source (ESS) in the Basque Country, an advanced centre for researching the atomic and molecular arrangement for materials.

The budget cuts are causing delays in the payment of Spain's financial contribution to some international RIs.

The Conference of Presidents of the Spanish regions agreed to create 24 new singular scientific Ris in the period 2007-2015.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI) from 2011 includes a provision to remove legal barriers to access RIs, to conform with EU provisions.

On e-infrastructures, FECYT and the Spanish Public Universities and Research Libraries Network (REBIUN) launched a national joint programme called RECOLECTA or Recolector de Ciencia Abierta (Open Science Harvester). RECOLECTA is a platform that gathers all the national open access scientific repositories and provides services to repository managers, researchers and decision-makers.

The objectives of RECOLECTA are:

•           To promote and coordinate the national infrastructure of open access digital scientific repositories in an interoperable manner based on the standards adopted by the global community,

•           To foster, support and facilitate the adoption of open access policies by all researchers from R&D centers and universities, the main producers of scientific knowledge in Spain,

•           To give greater visibility and both domestic and international application of the results from research carried out in Spain.

 

No concrete information was found on defining common rules to access RIs remotely, to access confidential data and regarding IPRs.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 10.6 in Spain compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).Ttransparency in recruitment is governed by Law 19/2013 ‘on transparency, access to public information and good governance.’ This law is of application in public universities, independent organisations and State agencies belonging to the general, regional or local administration. Any organisation receiving public subsidies above EUR 100 000, or  corresponding to more than 40 % of its annual income, is obliged to make its procedures public (active dissemination of information) and ensure free access to the related information. 

In 2013, 904 positions in Spanish organisations were published on the EURAXESS Jobs Portal. This represents 2.25 % of the total number of jobs published that year.

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Spain in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Spain_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 130 235 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Spain in 2011. This represents 5.6 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Law on Science, Technology and Innovation includes provisions on adopting and implementing the Charter and Code. Additionally, the EURAXESS Network in Spain, through 76 Service Centres (present in most Autonomous Communities), actively promotes the EURAXESS Rights initiative on implementing the Charter and Code.

By May 2014, 21 Spanish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which eight had received the ‘Human Resource Excellence in Research’ logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.

The Law on Science, Technology and Innovation creates a clear researcher career path by regulating the contractual agreements signed between the researchers and host institutions. Under this scheme, researchers are considered as civil servants, but the specificities of the research profession are taken into account. Moreover, researchers always have the option of choosing a non-civil servant career path.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 1.2 in 2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In order to increase the number of students taking science to a doctoral level, the Spanish government has implemented the Master Plan for Mentoring and Guidance of Students. The Spanish government has not adopted specific policies to increase female representation. However, some autonomous communities have adopted measures to increase the number of women with doctorates. For example, in the Asturias 64 % of all PhD students are women.

The Secretariat of State for Research, Development and Innovation of the Ministry of the Economy and Competitiveness supports researcher training, including the presentation of a doctoral thesis. Until 2013, this was known as the Formación de Personal Investigador (FPI) programme, but is now known as ‘Ayudas para contratos predoctorales para la formación de doctores’, i.e. grants for pre-doctoral contracts for doctoral training. In December 2013, EUR 6.7 million was approved for four years (2013-2016) for five centres in total to allow centres of excellence (those recognised under the FP7) to hire predoctoral researchers (‘Ayudas para contratos predoctorales Severo Ochoa para la formación de doctores 2013’).

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In Spain in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship from another EU-27 MS was 5.2 %  compared to 4.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 18 % in Spain compared to 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The CLARIN programme aims to attract researchers currently working in foreign institutions to pursue a research career in the Autonomous Community of the Principality of Asturias.

The ongoing subprogramme of specialisation in international organisations funds researchers, technologists, and science and technology managers to spend one to two years in an international scientific institution in another country. Following this period, the beneficiary has to develop a one-year project in a Spanish public research centre or technology-based enterprise.

The ongoing EMPLEA programme is designed to promote talent and employability through incentives for hiring and training RDI managers in a wide range of entities. This includes hiring experts in transferring and adding value to knowledge, including the preparation of proposals, provision of advice, management and provision of ongoing impetus to Horizon 2020 projects. The support takes the form of low-interest loans and a subsidy towards the cost of training these experts.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Spain has set up specific laws or actions to implement EU legislation in the field of research. Furthermore, the national authorities request the adoption and implementation of gender equality plans in research performing organisations.

The Strategic Plan for equal opportunities (2008-2011) includes gender issues in research. The Strategic Plan for Equal Opportunities (2014-2016) defines the objectives and priority measures to eliminate any discrimination on grounds of gender to achieve equal opportunities for women and men. It includes specific measures addressing research performing organisations (RPOs) and research policy.

The Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI 2011), the Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) and the plan (PECTI) implementing it, support positive changes regarding gender equality and mainstreaming in research. Notably, the LCTI introduces a provision according to which public research bodies should adopt within two years ‘gender balance plans’ that will be  monitored yearly.

There are national and regional institutes for women that promote gender equality and the gender dimension.

The Women's Institute, founded in the early 1980s, is an autonomous body, responsible for promoting and fostering the conditions that enable gender equality and women's participation in political, cultural, economic and social life.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 77 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 14.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Spain has measures supporting return after paternal leave. The LCTI guarantees the recognition of unemployment benefits and maternity leave for researchers, but only provided they have a permanent contract.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Spain has set up provisions to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes and/or projects.

As foreseen in the LCTI, the EESTI includes ‘gender equality’ and ‘gender dimension in research’ as one of its five basic principles and the PECTI mentions gender as a horizontal measure. However, there is not a specific programme to tackle these issues.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making,  the LCTI establishes that the evaluation and selection committees of the research system should follow the gender balance principle so that no gender group will account for no more than 60 % or less than 40 %.

TThe LCTI also addresses the issue monitoring gender balance at organisation level with two specific requirements: (1) the Information System of Science, Technology and Innovation (SICTI) should collect, treat and disseminate data disaggregated by gender, including indicators on the share of women and productivity and (2) Public Research Bodies should adopt within two years gender balance plans that will be monitored yearly, as mentioned above.

The Law for Equality (2007), the Law of Universities (2007) and the Equality Plan in the Public Administration (2011) also require a gender-balanced representation when composing committees.

At least 14 universities have plans on gender equality, according to the Women’s Institute.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 18.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 44.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Spain is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

The EESTI includes as an ‘Articulation mechanism’ the promotion of open access to data, publications and research results financed by public funds, including guidelines to create shared archives. The PECTI includes the promotion of open access through technological forums and platforms.

Regarding open access to publications, the Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI) (2011) indicates that publicly-funded research publications have to be made publicly available after, at the latest, an embargo period of 12 months. These publications have to be included in an open access repository. Also, universities and public research organisations should promote the development of open access institutional repositories.

There are some regional regulations (e.g. Asturias, Madrid and Catalonia) that promote open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications at regional level.

Moreover, up to 26 national research organisations and universities have developed their own open access to publications policy.

RECOLECTA is a platform that gathers all the national scientific repositories and provides services to repository managers, researchers and decision-makers. Since 2007, it is the result of the collaboration between the Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT) and the Network of Spanish University Libraries (REBIUN) run by the Conference of Vice-Chancellors of Spanish Universities (CRUE). Today RECOLECTA has 60 institutional open access repositories.

Spain was one of the leading countries to sign the Alhambra Declaration (2010) along with a group of open access stakeholders (e.g. editors, librarians, funding agencies, university rectors and authors) from South European countries (Spain, Portugal, France, Italy, Greece and Turkey), whose main languages are different from English, to promote open access to scientific publications.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 74.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the EESTI specifically promotes open access to data. FECYT represents Spain in the consortium of OpenAIRE Plus. It is a 30 month project, funded by the FP7, and its mission is to facilitate access to the ERA’s open access scientific production of the , providing cross-links from publications to data and funding schemes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, OpenDoar, a website directory of academic open access repositories, indicates that Spain has 109 open-access repositories.

Latindex and Dialnet are repositories for research publications done in Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries.

The FECYT (Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología – Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology) facilitates access to bibliographic research information (Web of Knowledge and Scopus) for researchers working at national research organisations. At regional and institutional level, purchases by consortia of university libraries are common. REBIUN provides access to the archives of 74 public universities and exchanges.

Regarding e-infrastructures, the national joint programme called RECOLECTA provides a free open access platform and support to Spanish repositories so that they comply with international standards of interoperability and sustainability.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Spain has not developed a specific knowledge transfer strategy. However, the LCTI, EESTI and PECTI encourage open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations.

The LCTI introduced changes in the IPR domain so that researchers can benefit from their patent earnings. It also introduced other changes to facilitate knowledge transfer: (1) increasing the value of transfer activities, (2) promoting the ‘units of excellence’, or (3) developing an open-access archive with research results. The LCTI encourages the creation of Technology Based Enterprises (EBTs) by allowing researchers to work part-time in private firms created by the organisations in which they are working and eliminating restrictions to the maximum share ownership of a private company (10 %) and being a board member in private companies.

Two calls provide funding (EUR 267 million) to promote the collaboration between research centers and universities and the private sector in R&I projects

One of the specific objectives of the PECTI is to increase public-private cooperation in RDI. The plan does not refer to specific agreements, but to specific projects. In this context, Spain has recently designed support schemes. The ‘Business leadership programme’ provides public funding (EUR 831.9 million) through its three sub-programmes: (1) private RDI; (2) enabling technologies; and (3) collaborative RDI.  The Torres Quevedo Programme (EUR 22.5 million) provides funding to recruit doctors with a proven working track record in companies. The Torres Quevedo Programme (EUR 22.5 million) provides funding to the recruitment of doctors with a proven working track record in companies.

Spain is a member of EDUgain through SIR. RedIRIS is the Spanish National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Concerning open innovation, Spain has decided to focus on preparing an annual plan that will facilitate the knowledge management (more than knowledge transfer).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 11.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 57.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Spain who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Spain has not set up a strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.

RedIRIS is the Spanish National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Concerning digital research services, FECYT provides access to bibliographic research databases (Web of Science and Scopus) to Spanish researchers. In addition, FECYT offers to researchers a Normalised Curriculum Vitae (CVN), that is a national standard  between institutions that facilitates the data interchange and the research evaluation processes.

The country provides federated services, like the services offered by FECYT to access to the main bibliographic research database (Web of Science), cloud services, and collaboration support.

The Digital Agenda for Spain is a soft action adopted in 2013 that provides a framework reference and a roadmap for the Digital Agenda strategy for 2013-2015 in order to develop the digital economy and society. One of its main objectives is to increase the efficiency of information technology investments in RDI.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 59.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 34.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Spain was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is member of EDUgain through SIR, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partner federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Spain, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 128 research performing organisations in Spain answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 18.7% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Spain shows that 39.5 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 48.4 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 12.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 59.2 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 39.0 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.8 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

However, it should be noted that some regional authorities, which fund research, did not responded to the survey.

Also, one very important research performing organisations is amongst the 'ERA limited compliance group' and this makes some indicators lower.

For the indicator 'Share of institutional funding allocated based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation', it should be noted that the majority of respondents to this question did not specify how much was based on an institutional assessment.

For the indicator 'Share of funder's research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations', it should be noted that the low percentage is due to the fact that  foreseen calls were not launched on time, due to budgetary restrictions.

For the indicator 'Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations', it should be noted that the result is considerably higher than the EU average, due to the existence of binding legislation.

For the indicator 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations', it should be noted the existence of the new law, but it has not yet been enforced.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

National Agency for Research || 2013 || X || X

Spanish Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (EESTI) (2013-2020) || 2013 || X || X

Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation (PECTI) (2013-2016) || 2013 || X || X

Research and Innovation Strategy for the Smart Specialisation of the regions || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Joint Programming Initiatives Article 185 initiatives || || ||

Bilateral and multilateral agreements in research || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National research infrastructure roadmap - Update || 2013 || X || X

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 || ||

Conference of Presidents of the Regions (agreement to create new research infrastructures) || 2007 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 || ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Statute for Research Interns || 2006 || ||

Attractive careers

Human resources training programme "Salvador de Madariaga" || || ||

Ramon y Cajal Programme (RyC) posdoctoral senior grants || 2005 || ||

Juan de la Cierva Programme || 2004 || ||

Euraxess in Spain || 2004 || ||

Accreditation and grants 'Centros de Excelencia Severo Ochoa' || 2013 || X || X

International and inter-sectoral mobility

Blueprint of a Law to support entrepreneurs and their internationalisation || 2013 || X || X

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The Women's Institute || 1980 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 || ||

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 || ||

Strategic Plan for equal opportunities || 2008 || ||

14 University plans on gender equality || || ||

National and regional Institutes for women  promote gender equality and the gender dimension || || ||

Strategic Plan for Equal Opportunities (2014-2016) || 2014 || X || X

Law for Equality || 2007 || ||

Law of Universities || 2007 || ||

Equality Plan in the Public Administration (2011) || 2011 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Digital Agenda for Spain || 2013 || X || X

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation - LCTI 2011 || 2011 || ||

Spanish State Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation” (PECTI) (2013-2016) || 2013 || X || X

Alhambra Declaration on Open Access || 2010 || ||

RECOLECTA || 2007 || ||

Latindex and Dialnet provide open access to publicationsdone in Spanish or Portuguese || || ||

REBIUN (Spanish Public Universities and Research Libraries Network) provides access to searches to the archives of 74 institutions || 2002 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Subprogramme of Institutional Strengthening in the PECTI || 2008 || ||

INNPACTO subprogramme || 2010 || ||

Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (LCTI 2011) || 2011 || ||

Business leadership programme || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

RECOLECTA || 2007 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

IRIS Network || 1988 || ||

eduGAIN || || ||

|| || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) and the Ministry of Employment and the Economy (MEE). The Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) is responsible for higher education and science policy related matters, whilst MEE is in charge of technological development and innovation policy. These two ministries account for over 80 % of government research and development (R&D) funding (with MEC totalling approximately 45 % of funding and MEE around 36 % in 2011). The Research and Innovation Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, advises the Government and its ministries on research, technology and innovation issues. The Council is responsible for the strategic development and coordination of Finnish science and technology policy as well as of the national innovation system as a whole.

The Academy of Finland, Tekes and the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation are the key public funders. The Academy of Finland (with a budget of EUR 329 million in 2013) mostly funds basic research through competitive grants. Tekes (with a budget of EUR 542 million in 2013) funds projects carried out by research institutes, universities and businesses. An additional funder, the Strategic Research Council, which will be established in 2014 under the auspices of the Academy of Finland and should be fully operational in 2015 (with a budget of approximately EUR 60 million in 2015), will fund challenge-driven research. At the level of public research performers, the Finnish public research system includes universities and public research organisations.

The ‘Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015’ (Research and Innovation Council) and the ‘Growth through expertise, Action plan for research and innovation policy’ (Ministry of Education and Culture and Ministry of Employment and the Economy, 2012) are two key policy documents that set out, at national level, the policy guidelines on the required measures and funding, and detail the actions required for implementing the government’s research and innovation policy. The Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2015-2020, currently under preparation, are due to be published by the end of 2014.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Finland represented EUR 382 per inhabitant in 2012, more than twice the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 369. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.9 % of total government expenditures and 1.1 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Finland has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Finland even when it regressed at EU-28 level.

A tax incentive for R&D activity and a double depreciation allowance for industrial investments were made available for businesses in 2013 and 2014.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based funding is mainly allocated by the Academy of Finland and Tekes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 91.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are systematically used to allocate project-based funding by the Academy of Finland. The Academy uses the following principles: scientific quality and innovativeness of the research plan, competence of the applicant/research team, feasibility of the research plan, cooperation contacts for the research and significance of the research project for advancing professional careers in research and for researcher training. Moreover, the ‘independence’ and ‘international’ components of peer review evaluations are strengthened under the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015. Evaluation based on the core principles of international peer review is not used by Tekes for its project-based funding, mainly because international peer review is not considered to fit with industry needs and the requirements for short 'time to grant'.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is always allocated based on institutional assessment. The 2013 and 2014 reforms introduced a new funding model for universities and universities of applied sciences. This new funding model aims at increasing the performance of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and at addressing the fragmentation problem. The formula for institutional funding for universities includes a research and international component, which amounts to 34 % of the funding: 1) number of refereed international publications, 2) number of other scientific publications and 3) funds obtained from competitive calls. If universities do not perform well in terms of research, their institutional funding will decrease. Moreover, a reform package aimed at restructuring public research organisations was approved in September 2013 by the Government.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Finland who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

There is no overarching legislation governing Finland’s participation in joint initiatives. However, the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015 support the principle of opening up of programmes for voluntary joint pilot projects of Member States (MS). Given that Finland is a relatively small country, participating in cross-border joint initiatives has typically ranked high on the R&I agenda. In order to boost research related to grand challenges, the Finnish government will set up the Strategic Research Council under the auspices of the Academy of Finland. The Strategic Research Council, which should be fully operational in 2015, will act as a 'third major funder' and will have a budget of EUR 70 million in 2017.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Finland allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Finland dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of MS, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Finland's participation is 2.3 % and the country received 2.5 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 164 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.6 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in nine of the 10 on-going initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 77 ERA-NETs, of which 18 are currently still running. The country has also participated in 12 ERA-NET Plus actions, of which seven are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, Finland is well represented in the European research landscape, being a member of all major European research organisations (e.g. European Space Agency).

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Finland has set up several agreements. Tekes has established cooperation agreements with funding agencies in the United States, Japan, China, Canada, Israel, Singapore and Korea. Tekes is also involved in Finnish Israeli Technology (FIT), a joint programme between Finland and Israel for technology applications in different technology areas. The Academy of Finland  also provides funding for international joint projects through various targeted calls, often as part of its research programmes or in the context of bilateral or multilateral agreements with countries such as China, India, Japan, Brazil and Russia. Finland is notably active in the Nordic research co-operation (NordForsk), now expanding to the Baltic States, and Arctic research. Moreover, the Team Finland initiative supports the internationalisation of key Finnish players and joint initiatives between businesses and public organisations.

The implementation of cooperation programmes is monitored by the respective institutions.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Finland allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is similar to within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

With regards to the cross-border interoperability of national programmes, the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015 support the implementation of effective principles, procedures and criteria and voluntary joint pilot projects between MS. Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards are routinely performed as part of joint calls. In its international programmes, notably within the framework of Nordforsk programmes, the Academy of Finland allows for the mutual recognition of evaluations. According to the Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015, the ‘independence’ of evaluations and their ‘international’ component are strengthened. The Academy of Finland implements Money follows researchers, a scheme enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer on-going grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives. Tekes funding schemes allow researchers to move to a research institution or company abroad, however, the grant cannot be transferred (researchers are considered as seconded employees of the organisation receiving Tekes funding).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 40.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Finland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Finland participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA-JET, EMBL, ESO, FAIR and ESRF. In 2012, the country contributes 0.8% of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures (RIs) included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Finland participates in the preparatory phase of 19 of them (38 %) and the country coordinates none of them. In terms of financial commitments to developing RIs, Finland is committed to fund 13 of them. They are: CESSDA, CLARIN, EISCAT_3D, European Social Survey (ESS), EURO-ARGO, BBMRI, EATRIS, ELIXIR, INFRAFRONTIER, INSTRUCT, ICOS, FAIR, PRACE (ex HPC).

With regard to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Finland participates in three of the seven consortiums, which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries. They are EATRIS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.

In terms of support for developing and implementing RIs, there has been increased acknowledgment about the importance of a RI policy at national level. The Finnish Research Infrastructure Committee (FIRI) Committee, set up by the Academy of Finland, is responsible for developing Finland’s RI roadmap. FIRI released the update of the Finnish national roadmap in March 2014. Finland’s strategy and roadmap for research infrastructures 2014–2020 updates the 2009 roadmap for RIs and includes a list of priority infrastructures. The roadmap includes references to the participating in the development of RIs mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. In terms of financial commitments, the Finnish government also plans to spend approximately EUR 20 million per year on developing and upgrading research infrastructures.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Regarding access to RIs, it is reported that cross-border access measures are implemented systematically in Finland. However, there is no overall policy to facilitate cross-border access to RIs.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Finland in the Researcher’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Finland _Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 40,003 FTE researchers in Finland in 2011. This represents 14.9 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 7.2 in Finland compared to 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 56 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Higher education institutions (HEIs), as they are independent employers, have considerable autonomy in the recruitment policy. Therefore, the situation varies from institution to institution. In general, all Finnish universities post their open vacancies online. Platforms may vary between universities and fields. All open vacancies in the public research institutes are published on a national website. Many institutions have policies to publish job vacancies on relevant Europe-wide online platforms, including EURAXESS.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Charter and Code principles were signed by the Rectors' Council of the Finnish universities and the Academy of Finland in 2009. The principles are being promoted through national higher education and research policy.

By May 2014, 12 Finnish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which six had received the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.

According to the Government programme the funding of higher education was reformed to better support the objectives of education, including higher completion of studies rates, quicker transfer to work, enhanced administration, improvement in the quality of education and research, internationalisation, and the profiling of higher education institutions in their own areas of strength. Universities apply a four-stage career system in research and education (doctoral student, post-doctoral fellow, independent senior researcher and professor) to make careers in research more predictable and transparent. A start has been made on implementing tenure track systems in the recruiting processes. While developing their researcher career processes, universities are collaborating with other organisations to enable flexible mobility between employers to facilitate common interests.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34 was 2.7 in 2011 compared to 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

According to the ‘National Guidelines for the Development of Doctoral Training’ (2011), universities are encouraged to offer students equal opportunities and rights in doctoral programmes regardless of their discipline, promote PhD training by integrating at least one Graduate School into the university structure, enhance the quality of graduate education in all disciplines, introduce four-year full-time structured education in all disciplines (target time frame), provide guidance and promote personal study plans, enhance interdisciplinarity, internalisation and intersectoral mobility, and incorporate systematic PhD training in all doctoral programmes, including transferable skills training, theoretical elements  and research. Since 2011, all Finnish universities have adjusted their doctoral training with these guidelines.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In Finland in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 6.4 % compared to 9.1 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.8 % in Finland compared to 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

In line with the Strategy for Internationalisation of HEIs in Finland, HEIs actively participate in EU education and research programmes and in ‘Nordplus’ mobility programmes of the Nordic and Baltic countries, in creating joint Masters degree programmes in the EU and the Nordic countries, and increasing Nordic research and innovation cooperation. The mobility of researchers, teachers and other personnel is also being promoted. In addition, the Finish Distinguished Professor Programme (FiDiPro) aims to strengthen scientific knowledge and know-how, add a more international element to the Finnish research system, bring added value into the national innovation system and support the research-driven profiling of universities and research institutes. Through this programme, universities and research institutes can hire foreign or Finnish professor-level researchers who have worked abroad for extended periods to conduct and promote research in Finland for a fixed period.

It is part of the remit of the Academy of Finland to promote international networking and activities of Finnish researchers, as well as support them in their international collaboration at foreign universities and research institutes. The Academy also provides funding for international joint projects through various targeted calls, often as part of its research programmes or in the context of bilateral or multilateral agreements with China, Estonia, Germany, India, Japan and Russia, as well as Brazil and Chile.

The Development plan for Education and Research 2011-2016 aims to increase research cooperation and mobility between business enterprises, higher education institutions and research institutes across sectoral boundaries.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Regarding national policies on gender equality, Finland has adopted a regulatory framework and a series of soft measures to promote gender equality in research. The Equality Act specifically supports gender equality by requiring HEIs and RPOs (public research organisations) to draw up and implement gender equality plans.

Gender equality in HEIs is also steered through MEC. The promotion of gender equality in human resources policies is one of the objectives for HEI, which have to report on their actions to the Ministry.

Moreover, the Academy of Finland is active in promoting gender equality through its Equality Plan (2014–2016), which applies to the Academy staff and researchers receiving funding from the Academy. According to the plan, efforts must be taken to establish an open, transparent expert review procedure in which the qualifications of applicants of either gender sex are evaluated equally and fairly. The Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2012-2015 provides support to gender equality within HEIs. The plan requires the monitoring of gender equality plans and promotes the development of gender-based statistics.

Gender equality in the labour market is also implemented through the amended Finnish Equality Act (2005) that specifies the obligations of authorities and employers. Compliance with the Equality Act is regularly monitored by the Ombudsman for Equality and the Equality Board.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 36.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding female researchers' careers, the 'Criteria for research funding decisions' of the Academy of Finland include objectives on women’s promotion as a research owner/manager.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding the gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no reported measures.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 31.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average share.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, Finland has adopted measures to support gender equality when decisions on research positions and research funding are made (Government Action Plan for Gender Equality (2012-2015) and Academy of Finland Criteria for research funding decisions).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 50.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Finland is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, several measures have been adopted since 2005 (see below). More recently, the Ministry of Education and Culture launched the Open Science and Research Project 2014–2017 (ATT) to foster open access to scientific information (publications, data and methods). There is however no overall legislative or policy provision supporting open access to scientific publications and data. Several working groups are being established to develop issues (policies, indicators, intellectual property rights, etc.) related to access to scientific information. In addition, a roadmap for 2014-2017 is being established, outlining the national targets with the overall intent of Finland being a world leader in open science and research by 2017.

Related to open access to publications, a working group on open access produced a report containing recommendations, which will be implemented as part of the ATT Project.

Moreover, the Open Data Programme, adopted in 2012 within the framework of the public sector information and communication technology (ICT) strategy, coordinates measures and projects aimed at increasing the opening and use of scientific publications. Whilst both the Academy of Finland and Tekes support open access to publications, the latter does not constitute a mandatory funding criterion within the Academy or Tekes funding programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 46.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the Academy of Finland supports open access to research data, however the latter does not constitute a funding criterion within the Academy programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 55.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, a national policy for the long term storage and reservation of data is not available yet. However, a national infrastructure for the long-term storage and reservation of cultural and research data is available as of 2014. Moreover, several measures such as the Open Data Programme and the ATT Project specifically are aimed at addressing this policy issue. Moreover, the National Digital Library supports digital services/infrastructure for accessing and preserving scientific information. At stakeholder level, the research data repository project on FinnOA gathers professionals interested in promoting open access to scientific information. In addition, most Finnish universities run their own scientific publications repositories, however the repositories are mostly used for storing materials such as students’ thesis, courses and other publications by the university. The DSpace User Group, which was set up under a project led by the National Library of Finland, supports the technical development of repositories at universities.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Finland has adopted several measures to support public-private linkages. The Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation (SHOKs) have constituted one of the key instruments supporting cooperation between academia, research institutes and the private sector. The 2013 international evaluation of SHOKs indicates that progress could have been faster and that SHOKs should become more strategic. The objective is to raise the ambition level and to speed up the renewal of industries, for instance by ensuring that Tekes funding is more competitive and targeted to high-quality and cross-disciplinary research carried out via international collaborations.

Through its research funding, Tekes also supports cooperation between the public research sector and businesses. The specific Tekes funding scheme for research institutions allows scientists to take the development of an idea further while preparing for the commercialisation of the idea into new business. Tekes also supports the creation, management and follow-up of spin-offs through the ‘Funding for young innovative companies’ initiative (YIC). Finland has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Finland who responded to the survey and support knowledge tranfer, open access, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Finland has adopted several measures in relation to implementing the Digital European Research Area (ERA). Finland has adopted several measures. The 2012 ‘Growth through expertise: Action plan for research and innovation policy’ outlines Finland’s strategy towards developing infrastructure for storing and managing digital research and innovation data. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential to making digital services possible. Finland is member of eduGAIN through HAKA. FUNET is the Finnish National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country and covering approximately 350,000 users. Finland has not set up a strategy for implementing the Digital ERA.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated and Premium services. Support to digital services is provided through Finland’s overall strategy ‘Putting data into use: A roadmap for the use of electronic data in research’ adopted in 2011. At stakeholder level, the Owela platform for co-design constitutes an example of action supporting research collaboration platforms. The CSC-IT Centre For Science Ltd also provides a wide selection of digital research services (scientific software, databases) to academia, research institutes and businesses.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

No overarching policy on electronic identity for researchers has been identified, although electronic identity is implemented. HAKA federation, the identity federation for the Finnish research and education sector, was established in 2005, with partial funding by MEC. In 2006, the Ministry introduced the large-scale adoption of the HAKA federation as a key strategic goal to enhance the IT infrastructure and services for research, education and culture. HAKA is a member of the eduGAIN inter-federation service.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 62 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Finland, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 20 research performing organisations in Finland answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 15.7% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Finland shows that 44.4 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 38.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 16.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 77.3 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 21.5 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.2 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

In terms of funders, it should be noted that one major funder did not reply to the survey. This means that all indicators related to funders should be interpreted with caution. The response rate amongst research performing is relatively good, although two major research organisations did not reply to the survey.

For the indicator 'Share of funders supporting gender equality in research', the figure is an underestimation, as one of the major funders replied that this dimension is not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Finland's National Reform Programme - tax incentives || 2013 || X || X

Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 || ||

Growth through expertise, Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||

Evaluation of the Research and Innovation Council || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Competitive funding by TEKES || || ||

International evaluation of the Academy of Finland || 2013 || X || X

International evaluation of TEKES || 2012 || X ||

Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines || 2010 || ||

Competitive funding by Academy of Finland || || ||

Peer review process by the Academy of Finland || || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Universities Act 558/2009 and related decrees on the reform of university funding model || 2010 || ||

Reform of public research institutes (incl. their funding model) || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 || ||

Joint programmes and bilateral agreements || || ||

Team Finland Strategy || 2014 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The Money Follows Researcher (MFR) agreement signed by the Academy of Finland || || ||

Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Finland’s strategy and roadmap for research infrastructures 2014–2020 || 2014 || X || X

Growth through expertise, Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||

Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011–2015 || 2010 || ||

Attractive careers

National Guidelines for the Development of Doctoral Training || 2011 || ||

Signature of the 'European Charter for Researchers’ & the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers by the Rectors' Council of the Finnish universities and the Academy of Finland || 2009 || ||

Strategy for the Internationalisation of Finnish  Education, Research and Innovation 2009–2015 || 2009 || ||

EURAXESS Finland || || ||

Finland Distinguished Professor Programme (FiDiPro) || || ||

Reform of the doctoral training system in line with the principles of innovative doctoral training || || ||

Academy of Finland grants and fellowships || || ||

Academy of Finland grants and fellowships || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Steering of HEIs || 2012 || X ||

Academy of Finland Equality Plan || || ||

Academy of Finland 'Criteria for research funding decision' || || ||

The Equality Act || || ||

Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2012-2015 || 2012 || X ||

Finnish Equality Act (2005) || 2005 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open Science and Research Project 2014–2017 || 2014 || X || X

Open Data Programme || 2013 || X || X

Working group on open access to publications and research data as part of the National Research Data Project (TTA) || || ||

National Digital Library || || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation (SHOKs) - International evaluation || 2007 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

FUNET, the Finnish National Research and Education Network || || ||

'Putting data into use', Roadmap for the utilisation of electronic data in research || 2011 || ||

CSC - IT Centre For Science Ltd || || ||

Growth through expertise: Action plan for research and innovation policy || 2012 || X ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Member of Edugain || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

In France, under the overall responsibility of the cabinet, the research and innovation (R&I) policy is driven by two government ministries. The Ministry of Education, Higher Education and Research (MENESR) is in charge of both the design and the coordination of research policy. The MENESR and the Ministry for the Economy, Industry and Digital Sector (MEIN) jointly develop the innovation policy. The MENESR designs the policy on research-led innovation (technology and knowledge transfer, support to entrepreneurship among students, doctoral students, researchers, trans-sectorial mobility, etc.), while the MEIN designs the other aspects of the innovation policy (demand-oriented innovation, commercial exploitation, etc.) In addition, the new law of 22 July 2013 on Higher Education and Research established a Strategic Research Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, responsible for proposing the main orientations of the national research strategy. The consultative High Council for Science and Technology was therefore removed.

The country has adopted a national strategy for R&I (SNRl); building on this first exercise launched in 2009, a second agenda focused on research (SNR) is to be published by the end of 2014. It shall convey, in more operational terms, the orientations set by ‘France Europe 2020’, the country’s overarching political Agenda for Research, Transfer and Innovation (decided in May 2013) and subsequently approved by the law on Higher Education and Research (ESR) on 22 July 2013. For the first time, this new strategy is consistent with European research and innovation policies, and therefore ensures coordination between national and European research programmes. The main additional aims are to better conduct the national research system, notably through five thematic 'Alliances', so as to better address societal grand challenges, in close consistency with Horizon 2020.

The main channel for R&I governmental funding is the general budget of the Research and Higher Education Inter-ministerial Mission (MIRES). In 2014, the budget for research under this mission (EUR 7.771 billion) has suffered a decrease in comparison with 2013 (EUR 7.853 billion), i.e. by EUR 83,2 million (-1,06 %).

It is completed by extrabudgetary funding resources, under the 'Investissements d'avenir' programmes. Some ressources are to be disbursed and some will generate interests that will be distributed. It is managed by the Commissariat-General for Investment, placed under the authority of MEIN, and MENESR as far as research and development is concerned. It is expected that 'Investissements d'avenir' programmes will contribute EUR 11.81 billion to R&D over the period 2010-2020. EUR 725.7 million should be distributed in 2014.

French public research is mostly funded through direct institutional funding (around 89 % in 2012, according to ANRT-FutuRIS calculations, roughly confirmed by the MESR "Note d'information" 13.06, July 2013). However, the most important public research performing organisations allocate internally an important part of their institutional budget based on the assessment of performance, i.e. laboratories performance is regularly evaluated in order to define the following year's budget.

In terms of competitive funding (close to 12 % of total public budget in 2013, latest figure available, provided by the ANRT), three main sources could be quoted: national agencies, notably the National Research Agency (ANR), the 'Investissements d'avenir' programme (PIA) and the EU Framework Programmes.

In terms of R&D funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in France represented EUR 232 per inhabitant in 2012, above the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 228. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.3 % of total government expenditures and 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in France has been positive, but below the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBAORD in  France, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved more negatively than the negative evolution observed in the EU-27. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in France than in EU-28.

However, as it does not include the French R&D tax credit (Crédit Impôt Recherche - CIR), GBAORD does not reflect the total support provided by the French government to R&D. Among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, France is characterised by the highest level of indirect government funding of R&D performed by private companies. At global level, French R&D tax credit is probably the most advantageous for companies performing R&D activities (for a budgetary cost of  EUR 5,17 billion in 2011 and continuously increasing: EUR 5,5 billion in 2012, EUR 5,75 billion in 2013, and EUR 6 billion estimated for 2014). However, many reports (in particular the ones of the French Court of Auditors) are very critical on the design of this Tax Credit Scheme, in particular because it mainly support multinational companies instead of SMEs, and also because its increase is not manageable properly by the State budget. The 2014 Country Specific Recommandation (CSR) for France also invites to 'Take steps to simplify and improve the efficiency of innovation policy, notably through an evaluation and if necessary an adaptation of the 'crédit d’impôt recherche'.

In addition and in a complementary way, the new Tax Credit for Employment and Competitiveness (CICE) is to be mentioned since innovation expenses are supposed to be the core of the eligible scope; implemented as of January 2013, it is planned to amount to EUR 10 billion in 2013, EUR 15 billion in 2014 and EUR 20 billion in 2015.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The three different and dominant sources of project-based funding are the National Research Agency's own budget, the "Investissements d'avenir" programmes (PIA) specific resources and the Single Inter-ministerial Fund (FUI). It is mainly awarded through a small number of executive agencies:

•           The National Research Agency (ANR), created in 2005, which covers basic research, applied research, innovation and technology transfer, supported through public/public and public/private partnerships. ANR funds research projects on a competitive basis and fully applies an international peer-review process. As a consequence of the current Government's willingness to rebalance the share between institutional recurrent funding and competitive funding at the benefit of the former, the budget of ANR has decreased from EUR 742 million in 2012 to EUR 687 million in 2013, and should be limited to EUR 605 million in 2014. But in addition, since 2010, the ANR is also the main operating agency of the Commissariat-General for Investment, in relation to the actions of the PIA in the field of higher education and research. As a matter of consequence, for 2014, ANR will manage EUR 600 million to be granted to excellent projects, EUR 50 million to be used as refundable advances and EUR 100 million as equity. In accordance with the new National Research Strategy (SNR), still to be adopted, the programming of the ANR should be designed in a coordinated manner with European programmes;

•           The Agency for Environment and Energy Management (ADEME) was created in 1991 to support and fund partnership-based environment and energy research activities. Beyond its own intervention budget (EUR 590 million for 2014), ADEME is also designated as implementing agency of several programmes belonging to the PIA, on behalf of the Commissariat-General for Investment;

•           Bpifrance, the new public investment bank which replaced OSEO as of 31 December 2012, provides support for R&D and innovation projects to businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This unique national agency benefited from a EUR 21 billion endowment in 2013. It is dedicated to promoting and supporting the industrial development, growth SMEs, through innovation and to promote technology transfer.

In addition, it has to be stressed that the Single Inter-ministerial Fund (FUI) pioneered this trend of competitive collaborative funding, and encourages public-private R&D partnerships. It corresponds to the competitiveness clusters’ ('Pôles de compétitivité') funding source. A third phase of this competitiveness cluster policy was launched in 2013, after an evaluation of the former ones. Through 34 industrials plans, typically oriented towards R&D high technology readiness levels projects supporting the development of export-oriented networks and partnerships, the 2013-2020 programme encourages clusters to develop new projects and foster the emergence of new products, processes and services. It should nonetheless be noticed that the 2014 CSR recommends that France should 'Ensure that resources are focused on the most effective competitiveness poles and further promote the economic impact of innovation developed in the poles'.

Launched in 2010, "Investissements d'avenir" programmes (PIA) is a noticeable governmental financial effort relying on competitive funding. It includes EUR 21.9 billion dedicated to higher education and research projects, out of which EUR 17.9 billion are to be allocated on a competitive basis. The fund is meant to support 10-year initiatives. Part of the money is directly allocated to finance actions, while the interests yielding from another part of the fund are also used. From the participant point of view, setting up the necessary co-ordinations between the project partners was deemed long and painful but was worth it. Profoundly cooperative behaviours were required to match the international juries’ expectations, that many of the projects supported are public-private by nature, that they all relate to local specialisation dynamics. They correspond to various ambitions and sizes, and are always aimed at supporting 'excellent' partnerships. While all the planned money of Plan 1 is not yet fully committed, a second ‘Investments for the Future Plan’ was announced on 9 July 2013, EUR 3.65 billion of which are earmarked to fund higher education and research projects.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are widely used in France.

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and systematically support the use of core principles of international peer review is higher than the EU average share of research funders supporting the use of core principles of international peer review.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is partly allocated on the basis of institutional assessments. Created in 2007, the Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education (AERES) was strongly criticised by the community of researchers and therefore replaced in 2013 (ESR law of 22 July 2013) by a new independent administrative authority: the French High Council on Evaluation of Research and Higher Education ('Haut Conseil de l'évaluation de la Recherche et de l'Enseignement supérieur'). This new structure, still being designed, aims to guarantee a homogeneous evaluation according to international standards for research organisations and looks after the quality of evaluations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and supports the institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is lower than the EU average. However, this result does not consider the allocation modalities imposed by the MENESR when allocating institutional funding. Indeed, the resource allocation model for French universities and higher education organisations performing research takes into account research performance. Institutional funding allocated to research organisations is accompanied by annual and multi-annual objectives set in the 'objective and performance contract' established between the State and a given research organisation. France is currently considering new criteria of research performance for this model.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in France allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in France dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), France's total of participation is 10.59 % and the country received 12.32 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 68 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) and 0.21 % of the GERD for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

The new (2014) National Research Strategy should reflect the orientations of ‘France Europe 2020’, the strategic Agenda for Innovation, Transfer and Research adopted in 2013. It will imply a multiannual programming (revised every five years) under the coordination of the MENESR. Recognizing that, given the nature and magnitude of the challenges ahead of us, no Member State can efficiently develop solutions alone, this strategy is intended to be 'consistent with the one developed in the framework of the European Union'. This is the reason why ‘Horizon 2020’ and ‘France Europe 2020’ grand challenges are, by and large, similar.

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases, in particular Alzheimer's (JPND), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change (FACCE), Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions. France became a member of the 10th Joint Programming Intiative (JPI) ‘More Years, Better Lives’ in 2014. France coordinates two of these initiatives: JPND and FACCE, the three-year anniversary of the latter was held in Paris in October 2013.

To ensure the optimal participation of French research organisations, the Thematic Alliances (thematic research coordination bodies) were requested to represent France in the JPI governing bodies while informing the ANR. Mirror groups have been set up to favour French stakeholder involvement in JPIs and ANR participates in all of them. The MENESR provides support to these mirror groups and coordinates them.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), France was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 127 ERA-NETs, of which 38 are currently still running. The country has also participated in 8 ERA-NET Plus actions, of which 4 are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with Third Countries and regions, France has developed a specific policy within its 2009 national research and innovation strategy. Until 2013, in terms of implementation, it concentrated its cooperation on Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC countries), Japan and South Korea, while also cooperating with many other Third Countries (United States, Canada, Mexico, South Africa, Mediterranean countries, Africa). France is now developing a new national strategy (SNR 2014) including an international part (cf. Action 9 of the strategic agenda for research, technology transfer and innovation 'France Europe 2020', which calls for a strengthening of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation), especially using EU funding in international cooperation. The country monitors the implementation of its strategy with indicators like co-publications and incoming mobility (scientific visa).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in France allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer review standards is more and more widely supported. The ANR, the main funder for international cooperation, now follows the so-called 'lead agency' procedure, which expects funding authorities to accept the results of the international project evaluation done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries. This process, initiated with Austria in 2011, was extended to Luxembourg in 2013 and to Germany and Switzerland in 2014 (reciprocal 'lead agency' arrangement with these two latters). An additional partnership with Romania is expected in 2015. The 'lead agency' procedure is also used with counterparts from a third country like Brazil (from 2012 onwards) and could be implemented with Mexico (under discussions).

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing joint programmes are fully applied by the ANR. In fact, the ANR was also established to improve the influence of the French scientific research community by developing transnational collaborations with European and international partners. Their implementation is supported through competitive and transnational projects, which are supported through two cooperation schemes: bi- or multi-lateral collaborations joint calls and regular national programmes with transnational collaborations. In 2011, 194 transnational projects were funded by the ANR (budget : EUR 57.7 million), which was a 21 % increase compared to 2010, but in 2012, due both to budget cuts and the reduction of the number of submitted projects, only 151 transnational projects (budget: EUR 41.9 million) could be funded.

French funding agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme which enables small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither French funding agencies implements Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

France participates in the following large international research infrastructures: the European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), The European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL).

In terms of participating in the development of research infrastructures (RIs) included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, France participates in the preparatory phase of 41 of them (83 %). It coordinates seven of them: EURO ARGO, ICOS, ECRIN, ERINHA, MIRRI, ANAEE and SPIRAL2.

In terms of financial commitments to developing these RIs, France is committed to fund 13 of them: EURO ARGO, IFMIF/EVEDA, BBMRI, ECRIN, ESRF UPGRADE, XFEL, ILL 20/20, FAIR, SPIRAL2, ESSurvey, EATRIC, JHR and PRACE (ex HPC).

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), France is involved in four of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries. France hosts ECRIN-ERIC, EURO-ARGO ERIC and DARIAH ERIC, is a member of BBMRI-ERIC and is an observer in EATRIS ERIC. France is about to become a member of the forthcoming ESSneutron ERIC.

In terms of supporting the development and implementation of RIs, France published its national strategy for research infrastructures in October 2012 and updated it beginning of 2013. This strategy integrates current and future international commitments, including Europe. France has also participated in the update of the European Strategy on Research Infrastructures (ESRI) in the context of ESFRI and Horizon 2020. At an organisation level, a centralised system of budgetary control on the operation and construction of facilities of national interest has been set up. A new governance system was established, including the presidents of the Thematic Alliances under the guidance of the MENESR. A high-level steering committee for very large RIs ("Très Grandes Infrastructures de Recherche", TGIR) is responsible for multiannual programming and participating in international organisations. It may seek scientific advice from the High Council of very large infrastructures. France started updating its national RIs strategy in July 2014.

With RIs expenditures of roughly EUR 1.2 billion per year, France ranks second in Europe, after Germany. Its financial commitment on ESFRI projects stands at around 127 MEUR/year.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Regarding access to French RIs, there are no more limitations for Member States stakeholders. For partners from outside the ERA, access depends on inter-institutional agreements.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for France in the Researchers Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/France_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 249.086 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in France in 2011. This represents 8.7 researchers per 1000 labour force compared to 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 39.2 in France compared to 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 57 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Universities job vacancies are published on a single website and open to all: the Galaxie website: (https://www.galaxie.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/ensup/candidats.html).

Those interested can register to receive a personalised newsletter that will inform them of the job offers that match their criteria. In addition, all job positions in universities (lecturers, professors, PRAG – high school professors teaching in higher education institutions-, contractual teachers), are published  by the MENESR that also ensures their publication on  EURAXESS Jobs: http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/jobs/jvSearch

About 5.000 jobs are published yearly. Beginning in 2014, all ATER job offers (fixed term contracts for teaching and research positions in universities) are posted on EURAXESS Jobs. In public research organisations, competition opening campaigns are published on public research organisations websites (in French and English for some of them) and on the Légifrance website (legal French website).

Job descriptions for fixed-term contracts are available on every public research organisation website. Some public research organisations (PROs) also publish their job offers on EURAXESS jobs: INRA, INRIA.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

Since 2008, 38 public higher education and research institutions have committed to implement the principles of the Charter and Code. The Charter and Code principles have been promoted since then through the EURAXESS France network, the Marie-Curie actions and more specifically the COFUND, which is supported by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research and implemented by public institutions.

The implementation of the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) is being promoted by means of information through a dedicated human resource network, the ‘GTN RH’ network and seminars of higher education institutes (HEIs) human resources directors.

By May 2014, 12 French organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which one had received the 'Human Resources Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.

The ANR 2013 programme planning completes the three-year cycle spanning 2011-2013, in a context of budget restrictions. The programme planning orientations for 2013 were adopted by ANR’s Governing board on 14 November 2012. The programme planning framework has been restructured to integrate the general orientations set by the Minister of Higher Education and Research. The 2013 edition thus hinges around three components:

• The non-thematic instruments (Blanc programme, Young Researchers, Post-doctoral Return, Industrial chairs, etc.);

• The construction of the ERA and multilateral collaborations (ERA-NETs and multilateral programs);

• The thematic programme planning (28 programmes).

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 1.7 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The implementation of the new doctoral contract (2009) has significantly improved the working conditions of young researchers as well as the national R&D targets. It mainly aims to:

•           Establish a single contractual framework, providing more protection and applicable to all public employers;

•           Integrate for each doctoral trainees a single contract for all activities directly related to the preparation of his/her PhD, but also relevant activities such as training;

•           Establish a single remuneration platform;

•           Ensure full social security coverage.

This is a three-year term work contract for doctoral trainees in universities and public research institutions. It may be extended for a year for professional or personal reasons, such as maternity leave or sick leave. The doctoral contract guarantees all the statutory social aspects of a ‘traditional’ employment contract. In September 2010, 5.320 students registered for their first year of doctoral training signed a doctoral contract.

The CIFRE is a partnership between French industry or other employment sectors, a research laboratory and a doctoral candidate. During a three-year contract with the company or other private employer, the doctoral trainee benefits from a high-level of scientific supervision that will help in writing and defending a PhD dissertation while contributing to research activities. The system is managed by the ANRT (Association Nationale de la Recherche Technique). CIFRE fellowships are funded by the French Ministry of Education, Higher Education and Research. In 2012, 1.350 CIFRE agreements were signed. Over the period 2013-2014, the goal is to reach 1.375 agreements annually.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In France in 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 8.3 % in France compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 35.4 % in France compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The Chairs of Excellence Programme aims to attract the best researchers, professors, foreign or French, by offering, with the assistance of the host establishments and organisations, substantial resources to build up a team and to start an ambitious project with clear anticipated impact. The programme functions by means of a call for proposals open to all research disciplines. The 2012 programme proposes three types of chairs:

•           Long-term Junior;

•           Senior Chairs of Excellence;

•           Short-term Senior Chairs of Excellence.

The programme 'Industrial Chairs' aims to accompany research projects jointly led by public research institutions and enterprises. It encourages the integration of eminent French (expatriated or not) or foreign professors into higher education and research institutions, or research organisations, and reinforce the best initiatives developed in French higher education and research. The programme implies establishing a strong and lasting partnership between the research institution and enterprises in a high-priority and strategic area for the parties concerned. The aim is to provide more effective support to industrial research in all areas. The industrial chairs' objective is firstly to perform fundamental and applied research, and secondly to ensure training through high-level research. Researchers from all disciplines can submit a project on any topic they choose. Joint research structures (structures communes de recherche), of which there were 214 in early 2014, are partnerships between tertiary research institutions and businesses. The two partners commit to pool their resources for a period that is longer than the standard for research projects or contracts. Generally, it is four to five years and is rolled over once or twice. The advantages lie not just in the integration of the two worlds and the pooling of financial resources, but also of infrastructures and know-how. These structures also facilitate the transfer of technology.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Regarding gender equality in public research, significant efforts are being made in France, including through legally binding schemes when deemed necessary. Under the law of 12 March 2012 on 'access to the public positions and the improvement of conditions on employment of contract staff in the public service, the fight against discrimination and containing various provisions related to public service' has provided the legal framework for improving the field of gender equality.

After some debate, parity was finally imposed in voting procedures for elections in all governing bodies of universities and other Higher Education Organisations by the law of 22 July 2013 on Higher Education and Research: 'Each candidate list is alternately composed of one candidate of each sex'. Parity is also required by law within the National Council for Higher Education and Research, in the Board of the new High Council for Evaluation and the new Strategic Research Council. Moreover, a systematic integration of gender equality was introduced in the contractual dialogue between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research, universities and research organisations. Not only does this feature allow institutions to engage in implementing a comprehensive policy on gender equality, but it also enables the monitoring and evaluation of commitments. In addition, the Charter for Equality was signed between the Ministry of Research and the Conference of Rectors and the Head of Schools of Engineers at the beginning of 2013. The Irene Joliot-Curie Prize is set to promote the role of women in research and technology in France.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 88.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Researchers working in the public sector (including universities) in France are civil servants. The University Freedoms and Responsibilities Act (2007) allows universities to provide bonuses and other financial incentives to researchers and researchers with a teaching position. The law ensures rights for paternity leave to civil servants, including their position after a break. Parental leave is considered an effective service in its entirety for a period of 18 months at most.

The "leave for research or thematic conversions" (Congés pour recherches ou conversions thématiques, CRCT) is a 6-month or one-year break during which you can decide to focus on research when you work at the university (where you teach and do research) instead of teaching. In case of maternity leave, women have a priority if they ask for that kind of break so that they can come back and do only research, i.e. catching up with research before starting teaching again. This is therefore in one of the texts regulating human resource policies on breaks and leaves.

The Equality Plan includes a measure that is called 'Better integration of equality in researcher's career'. This measure includes actions such as re-opening the discussions on the flexible working time, improved integration of professional and personal life through e.g. teleworking, and development of comparative tables to analyse promotions. Career advancement and promotion of equality between women and men is an action line of the Equality Plan.

The EADS Corporate Foundation and the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research recognises achievements of women scientists with the Irène Joliot-Curie Award. France participates in the L’Oréal-UNESCO for Women in Science program also with French Fellowships.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The Strategic Group on Gender launched by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research in 2011 published its conclusive report in January 2013. Through 20 recommendations, the document defines the strategic directions for research on gender issues in France. Based on an impartial evaluation of the current situation, the report went beyond research and its organisation and touched upon many systemic dimensions. The recommendations were structured around seven main themes:

• Organisation of higher education and research;

• Education;

• Training;

• Research funding;

• Publication, distribution and reviews;

• Careers;

• Parity in institutions of higher education and research.

Some of these proposals were taken on board by the law of 22 July 2013 on Higher Education and Research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 5.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 50.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, the decree of 30 April 2012 under section 56 of the Law of 12 March 2012 stipulates that there should be at least 40% of nominations for each gender in senior management functions in 2018. Failure to progressively comply with this obligation is punishable by a financial penalty proportional to the deficit of the appointments observed. These objectives started to be applied by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research to all supervisory jobs, beyond those listed in the decree (jobs universities and public institutions) as of 2013. For instance since 2013, there should have been at least three women in the upper panels of aggregation (procedure of recruitment of professors in legal, political, economic or management disciplines).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 28.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 24.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in France is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, a decisive position was stated by the Minister of Research and Higher Education at the fifth ‘Days of Open Access’ (January 2013): 'Scientific information is a public good that should be available for all'. As a consequence, the French Government wishes to develop green and gold access in a balanced and complementary way, while assisting the users that prefer gold access during the negotiation of licences with publishers. An additional, original option is promoted, called 'Platinum Road', which is a hybrid between green and gold access aimed at developing an open access to publishing that allows authors and readers to access scientific publication without payment.

Related to open access to publications, with hundreds of French open access journals, tens of open disciplinary warehouses and institutional archives, and a handful of platforms, France appears to be rather active. Nonetheless, in 'Open access in France: state of the art' (2010), and the latest (August 2013) ScienceMetrix report entitled 'Proportion of Open Access Peer-Reviewed Papers at the European and World Levels—2004-2011', France is still below 50 % of open access articles, i.e. circa 46 %, including 40 % of green and hybrid. New policy efforts are therefore deemed necessary.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 80.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, in the context of the national action plan supporting open access, the 'OpenData France Association' was launched in October 2013. It aims to represent and support local communities in the process of opening up their public data. France is also a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 12.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 71.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, France pursues the optimisation of its HAL open archive platform (Online Hyper Articles Platform), which collects institutional archives. HAL is a national and disciplinary platform, interoperable with local and international thematic archives as PubMed Central or Arxiv. It receives nearly 3.000 documents per month and hosts more than 80 archive collections of scientific institutions. ANR-funded projects have to be integrated in the HAL open archive platform. A partnership via a Memorandum of Understanding was created between Research Institutions, universities and ‘Grandes Ecoles’ for the joint development and management of HAL.

In addition, the project 'Bibliothèque scientifique numérique' was set up in 2011 for research and higher education staff to access to scientific resources. A Steering Group representing all actors in the field of scientific and technical information was established to ensure coordination and issue recommendations.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, France has been developing a comprehensive knowledge transfer strategy since 1999, intending to foster open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. An important milestone was reached in July 2013, when the new law on Higher Education and Research added the transfer, as along with dissemination and valorisation, in the mission of Higher Education and Research Institutions. That reinforced the transfer plan launched at the end of 2012, comprising of 15 specific measures to enhance transfer, being implemented in 2013-2014. One of the measures is: 'Establishing a new set of indicators for the monitoring of transfer activities'.

The French Knowledge Transfer strategy is mainly implemented through the "Investissements d'avenir" programme, which funds SATT (Sociétés d’Accéleration du Transfert de Technologies, Private Companies for Accelerating Technology Transfer), CVT (Consortiums de Valorisation Thématiques) and IRT/ITE (Instituts de Recherche Technologique, Instituts pour la Transition Energétique). This comprehensive set of organisations is supposed to form a continuum of open innovation infrastructures. On the whole, these projects are designed to develop sustainable public-private partnerships over a 10-year period. This substantial investment of EUR 3 billion is intended to deeply modify the French knowledge transfer landscape.

This is a key operational objective of the National Research Strategy ‘France-Europe 2020’ (May 2013), through 'Action#2” “Enhancing technological research capabilities'. Other complementary actions are five CEA-TECH platforms, Carnot 3.0, and the new National Research Agency’s calls for proposal named 'LabCom'. The latter initiative aims to create 100 small and medium-sized enterprise (SME)-public research joint labs.

Notably through SATTs and other structures, funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the strategy.

Strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in France. Launched in 2006, the 'Instituts Carnot' particularly aims to increase research partnerships between Research Performing Organisations and companies (network of 34 Institutes, allocated a budget of EUR 120 million in the framework of 'Investissements d'avenir' programme) and thus contribute to developing knowledge transfer.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 19.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in France who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

As regards the implementation of the Digital ERA, France has not set up any strategy. However, RENATER, the French Research and Education Network, was launched in 1993 in order to federate telecommunication infrastructures for research and education. It functions as the National Research and Education Network (NREN) and provides dedicated specialised Internet service for the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Moreover, in terms of education related to public e-infrastructures, the new law on research and higher education of 22 July 2013 planned to provide, on a comprehensive basis, higher education training services with digital resources and training. As an implementation mode, the Ministry of Higher Education and Research has launched 'France Université Numérique' (FUN), a MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses) platform. Since October 2013, high education institutions who wish to provide their students with training in French and open online educational resources have benefitted from FUN (part of 'France Europe 2020’). By bringing together French universities and schools on this project it will give them international visibility, and enable all public access to various courses and quality worldwide. FUN courses are designed by university professors and their international academic partners. Under the coordination of the Secretary of State for Higher Education and Research, technical inputs come from INRIA for the deployment of the platform, CINES for the design, administration and hosting IT infrastructure, and RENATER for infrastructure networks.

Concerning digital services, France provides federated services and premium services (Consultancy, NREN service implementation support).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 80.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is similar to the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

RENATER is the French member of the eduGAIN service intended to enable a trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partner federations. It provides national and international connectivity to more than 1 300 sites of educational and research institutions in Metropolitan France and in the overseas territories, amounting to 160 000 researchers and 2.2 million students. It specifically manages, along with other institutions, the identity federation. Although in France, there are 176 institutions collaborating with the identity federation platform, there is no top-down policy initiative at national level related to the action.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in France, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 67 research performing organisations in France answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 25.8 % of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in France shows that 40.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 48.5 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 10.6 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 91.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 8.1 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.0 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Some large universities and research organisations did not reply to the survey, which decreases the representativeness of the results for research performance organisations.

Regarding the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project-based funding' it only reflect the share of project based funding handled by research funding agencies, and not the share of total research funding allocated as project based funding in France. The survey did not "captured" institutional funding, as the latter is mainly provided by the Ministry of National Education, Higher Education and Research (MENESR), which is not a funding agency and thus did not responded to the survey. Moreover, among those research funders which answered the survey, results are strongly influenced by the role played by the ANR as funder of projects at national level. It must be reminded that, according to various concordant estimates, between 11% and 12 % of the total R&D public budget is allocated as project based funding.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Act on higher education and research || 2013 || X || X

National Research Agency || 2005 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Law on freedoms and responsibilities of universities (LRU) || 2007 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Strategic Agenda "France-Europe 2020" (2013) and new National strategy for research (2014) || 2013 || X || X

Investment for the Future Plan (PIA) || 2009 || ||

PRES clusters for research and innovation || 2006 || ||

(Thematic) Alliances || 2009 || ||

French-German Agenda 2020 || 2010 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

National funding agency- ISO 9001 certification for calls programming, selection and funding, monitoring || 2008 || ||

ANR Lead Agency Procedure || 2011 || ||

Bilateral agreements between ANR and BMF/DFG (DE), ESRC (UK), NWO (NL), MICINN (ES), FWF(AT) and ANCS (RO) || 2011 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Research infrastructure roadmap  2012-2020 || 2012 || X ||

Attractive careers

Recognition of PhD in the public sector (High level public recruitments) || 2013 || X || X

Support coordinated personalised information and services to researchers through EURAXESS; EURAXESS France portal || 2012 || X ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Charter for gender equality between Ministry of Research and Conference of rectors and head of schools of engineers || 2013 || X || X

Act on higher education and research. Art 13, 37, 50, 53 || || ||

Office for promotion of gender equality and fight against discrimination-Ministry of research || || ||

Action Plan on equality || 2012 || X ||

Law of 12 March 2012 on employment in public sector and fight against discrimination || 2012 || X ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Memorandum of Understanding for a coordinated approach on a national level to open archiving of scientific output || 2006 || ||

HAL - Online Hyper Articles Platform || 2007 || ||

Action Plan on open access (announced in January 2013) || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

New policy on technology transfer (presented in November 2012) || 2012 || X ||

Competitiveness Clusters - Third phase 2013-2018 || 2013 || X || X

Carnot Institutes || 2006 || ||

France Brevets || 2010 || ||

SATT || 2009 || ||

Public Investment Bank (BPI) (Creation by regrouping OSEO, BDPME and other organizations) || 2012 || X ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Establishment of new bodies to supervise and coordinate research infrastructures (Directing Committee and High-level Council) || 2012 || X ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN (RENATER in France) || 1993 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The governance of a research and development (R&D) system in Croatia is highly centralised under the authority of the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports (MSES). It is dominated by public funding primarily based on annual budget cycles proposed by the National Science Council, the highest advisory body for the scientific research system. The Agency for Science and Higher Education (ASHE) is responsible for setting up a national network for quality assurance.

The main funding bodies, in addition to the MSES, are the Croatian Science Foundation (CSF) and the Business Innovation Agency of Croatia (BICRO, recently renamed to HAMAG-BICRO following a merge of two agencies). A remaining stakeholder in the research and innovation (R&I) system, the Agency for Mobility and EU Programs (AMPEU) does not provide funding in order to organise programmes for lifelong learning and the EU mobility programmes.

The reorganisation of a more efficient R&D system is the main driver of the amended Act on Science and Higher Education (15 July 2013), which also introduced a new model for financing scientific activities from the State budget via MSES, based on the multi-annual institutional funding for research programmes. It also launched the scientific centres of excellence (SCE) for the first time in Croatia.

The research system in Croatia is dominated by the public R&D sector over a private sector which is technologically weak and underinvested in the domain of research and innovation. Universities play a leading role in both research manpower (80% of total researchers) and performing research activities (54% of R&D in 2012). The sector of the public research organisations (PRO) consists basically of 26 public research institutes and around 50 scientific research units classified as other legal entities.

The new Strategy for Education, Science and Technology was publicly presented on 16 September 2013 and adopted in January 2014 which substitutes the multi annual research, development and innovation (RDI) strategy.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Croatia represented EUR 74 per inhabitant in 2012, less than half the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was similar (EUR 74). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.6% of total government expenditures and 0.7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Croatia was positive, but below the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Croatia even when it regressed at EU28 level.

The main policy instruments for financing scientific research follows a horizontal approach to assure the balanced development of the six main fields of science. Within the given policy context, the majority of public resources are allocated by the MSES employing four basic instruments:

•           Institutional funding (block grant), including salaries for researchers (33%),

•           Research grants for operational costs of research projects (competition based program), “Research Projects” program (10%),

•           Grants for new employment positions for young researchers through the competition driven “Junior Research Program” (31.4%);

•           Research supporting programs such as scientific publishing activity, support for scientific and professional conferences, associations, and research equipment (8.8%).

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

With the new Act on Science and Higher Education the allocation of the competition based research project grants has been transferred from MSES to the CSF, and assumes a rigid evaluation process that should end up with a small number of high quality research projects (around 20% of proposals). The total funds allocated to CSF in 2013 for research projects amounts to around EUR 6.8 million that is only about 40% of the previous year budget. However, the government plans to increase these funds to EUR 13.5 in 2014.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The international peer review processes for allocating research grants have a long tradition in Croatia introduced by MSES at the beginning of 2000s. In 2006, the MSES introduced an international peer-review evaluation system for research-project applications, and new criteria for project funding, in line with EU standards, to stimulate and reward excellence, and to encourage the mainstreaming of resources into larger research programmes.

The principle funding agency for scientific research, the CSF), is practising an international peer-review process. The MSES is also using external expertise for evaluating research projects proposals.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

In Croatia the government finances more than 85% of research at public institutes and 78% of universities, while the business sector finances a small portion of university research (9.8%) and public institutes (3.4%) (ERAWATCH 2013a).

At universities, budget funds make around 70 % of total university revenues while the remainder comes from scholarships and commercial projects. The criteria for funding tertiary institutions are rather formal and include input from a number of employees (ERAWATCH 2013a), which is the estimated amount of work required to implement the approved programs, which correlates with the number of employees, the estimated workload according to the defined standards in the higher education institutes (HEIs), and the assessed quality of the programs. In practice, however, allocations are based on the previous year’s allocations and there is no consistent mechanism based on the above-mentioned criteria. A positive new development in the academic year 2012/13 was the introduction of a pilot scheme for three year funding agreements between the State and public HEIs. In addition public HEIs receive tuition fee subsidies for their students according to a recent government decree.

With the new decision on multi-annual institutional financing of research activities 2013-2015, the MSES provide only a lump sum for multi-annual institutional funding, the amount of which depends on the institutional performance indicators. For the first time, these agreements introduced performance indicators, allowing institutions to receive additional funding if they meet specific policy objectives. For example, indicators are related to the social dimension of the HEI through fostering access of under-represented groups and mature students, or related to a reduction.  Performance-based funding is very limited and is estimated at around 1 % of overall MSES funding for HEIs.

In the area of institutional assessment Croatia is applying the European standards and guidelines based on the Law on Quality Assurance in Science and Higher Education.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate of institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

In 2014, the main instruments of the cross-border cooperation in Croatia (the IPA programme) were substituted by the Structural and Cohesion funds after Croatia became the 28th EU member in July 2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting transnational cooperation nor measures supporting joint research agendas.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Croatia’s total participation is 0.3 % and the country received 0.2 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 148 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013.

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in one of the 10 on-going initiatives - the Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer).

The number of calls with predefined priorities with other countries in Croatia is 17, nevertheless not all of them are active; budget is not known. When it comes to calls with predefined priorities with other countries on grand challenges, Croatia is participating in four, namely HERA JRP Cultural Encounters, HERA Joint Research Programme Call for Proposals, HERA Joint Research Programme Cultural Encounters, HERA-2009-01 (NETWATCH 2013).

In Horizon 2020 Croatia is involved in two of the four programmes undertaken by several Member States (Article 185 initiatives).

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of eight ERA-NETs, of which two are currently still running. The country also has participated in two ERA-NET Plus actions - of which one is still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

The CSF has one bilateral agreement with the German Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG, which includes the popularisation of DFG programmes open for Croatian researchers. Together with the DFG the Croatian Science Foundation is offering mobility Instruments; joint research projects and DFG Forschergruppen (Research Units), Sonderforschungsbereiche (SFBs, Collaborative Research Centers) and DFG Internationale Graduiertenkollegs (IGKs, International Research Training Groups). The Research Units are the most flexible funding instrument (Croatian Science Foundation 2013).

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters have been launched, for example a cluster in energy and sustainable research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Croatia has rather intensive international research cooperation through bilateral, multilateral and transnational projects and programmes. Within the bilateral research projects Croatian institutions signed more than 200 research agreements while  multilateral projects  include projects with the institutions like the European Science Foundation (ESF), UNESCO, NATO, UNICEF, the Alps-Adria Working group, Central European initiative, etc.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is similar to that within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Croatia participates in the four initiatives aimed at regional cooperation which should contribute to the cross-border interoperability of national programmes and permit joint financing of innovation, R&D and related actions.  They include: the South East Europe (SEE) 2020 Strategy adopted on 21 November 2013, the Western Balkans Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation (WISE) for the period 2014- 2020, adopted on 25 October, 2013, the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR) which is a macro-regional strategy adopted by the European Commission in December 2010 and endorsed by the European Council in 2011 and the EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region which is in progress.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Croatia allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Croatia participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RIs): the European Space Agency (ESA), the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). The country contributes 0.07 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), EMBL, the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participating in the development of RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of one of them (2 %). So far, Croatia is not committed to developing any of these RIs.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Croatia is involved in one of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries, namely DARIAH ERIC.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of Research Infrastructures, the MSES adopted in December 2013 the Draft Development Plan for Scientific Infrastructure to identify priorities for investment in scientific infrastructure at the national and pan-European level and defines the criteria for selecting projects. The Plan has undergone the process of public consolation  early 2014.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Croatia has not applied a strategic approach and policy objectives in accessing intergovernmental European infrastructures. Access to the national research infrastructure within the scientific institutions is organized by the Agency for Mobility and European Programmes.

However, in the last few years a broader approach to research infrastructure has emerged primarily in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector where development applied a top down approach initialized by the government. «e-Hrvatska» the institution responsible for ICT infrastructure development in Croatia, implemented two programs relating to research infrastructure, in addition to Broadband Internet and HitroNet aimed at building centralized network of public services. Moreover, MSES have been constantly improving the CARNET network implementing the program of distant learning. MSES, jointly with CARNET and the Rudjer Bosković Institute launched the «Center for on-line data base» project ensuring a network approach to commercial databases and providing free databases for the science and research communities in Croatia (scientists, assistant and students).

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile  for Croatia in the Researchers’ Report 2014.

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 6,847 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Croatia in 2011. This represents 4.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 110.4 in Croatia compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 43 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Under the Act on Scientific Activity and Higher Education (Article 40), an appointment to a research position within public scientific research organisations must be based on a public competition, published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Croatia, on the official Internet website of the scientific research organisation as well as on the official Internet website for ERA job vacancies (i.e. the EURAXESS Jobs portal). Since Croatia’s accession to the EU, the deadline for submitting applications is 30 days. Prior to this, the period was eight days and it was at that time, but no longer is, legal to restrict recruitment to Croatian candidates.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The implementation of the Charter and Code principles is publicly promoted and supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports and the Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes. The promotion of the Charter and Code principles is also foreseen in the Action Plan for Mobility of Researchers and the Strategy for Education, Science and Technology. To date, all public research institutions (including HEIs), the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, the Croatian Science Foundation and three research organisations from the private sector have endorsed the Charter and Code (37 altogether) and they are working on improving their human resources strategy for researchers in accordance with those principles. The Ministry, together with the Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes, offers support and information about the implementation process.

By May 2014, 18 Croatian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 14 had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The Act on Scientific Activity and Higher Education (2013 amendment) includes measures to widen the selection process for post-doctorates, introduce promotion on the basis of merit rather than seniority and compulsory retirement of researchers at the age of 65.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.8 in 2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In 2009, the Doctoral Studies Rulebook of the University established a skills agenda for the development of additional skills as one of the core elements of doctoral education and initiated specific programmes for transferable skills development in doctoral education. The Central Office of Doctoral Studies and Programmes is in charge of providing the necessary tools for implementing a skills agenda, and supporting PhD candidates in developing transferable skills. The University of Zagreb initiated a nationwide project in 2013 to provide all Croatian universities with human resources programmes for sustainable skill development. The project is called Modernising Doctoral Education through Implementation of CROQF (Croatian Qualification Framework) and is coordinated by the University of Zagreb in cooperation with six partners; all Croatian public universities and three associated partners (Agency for Mobility and EU Programmes, Croatian Employment Service and Young Scientist Network – MLAZ). The overarching objective of the project is to enhance the implementation of the CROQF in the national doctoral education system as well as develop and modernise doctoral student qualifications during their doctoral studies by enhancing their professional and personal competences using CROQF standards.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 2.5% in Croatia compared to 4.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.4% in Croatia compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

The Ministry of Science, Education and Sports has a long-standing policy of attracting prominent Croatian scientists currently working abroad, and assisting them in achieving the conditions for carrying out scientific research careers in Croatia. The new International Fellowship Mobility Programme for Experienced Researchers in Croatia – NEWFELPRO is a fellowship project co-financed through the Marie Curie FP7-PEOPLE-2011-COFUND program. Its total value is EUR 7 million, of which 60% is financed from national sources. Eighty-three fellowships are available as part of the NEWFELPRO project. There are specific schemes for outgoing and incoming fellows, including diaspora Croatians returning to the country. In addition, under the reintegration fellowship scheme within this programme, a total of nine two-year fellowships will be awarded with a view to reversing the “brain drain”.

An Action Plan for the Mobility of Researchers 2014-2016 will be published in 2014.

One of the strategic objectives of the NEWFELPRO programme is to provide an impetus to an effective labour market for researchers in Croatia, connecting industry and universities, public and private research institutions, and industrial laboratories, enhancing knowledge transfer and preparing better employment opportunities for researchers with special attention to innovative processes for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Croatia has set up a gender equality strategy in research institutions.

Croatia has made considerable progress in the area of setting a policy framework for women's rights and gender equality, enshrined in both legal and strategic policy documents such as the National Policy for Gender Equality 2011-2015. Croatia has also set an Office for Gender Equality as the main institutional mechanism for gender equality.

Research institutions themselves are responsible for monitoring and assessing policy implementation relating to gender equality.

The main policies that promote the equal treatment for men and women in society and science are formulated in the framework documents – the Act on Scientific Activity and Higher Education (OG 123/03) and  the Labour Act (OG 149/09, 61/11). The regulations that specifically treat gender equality include the Gender Equality Act (OG 82/08), the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination (Official Gazette 85/08), and the Act on Maternity and Parental Benefits (85/2008). These acts provide regulations to put men and women in the same position regarding working conditions and career progress.  The acts address also the research sector.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey did not reported support to gender equality in public research.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

In Croatia, the government has set targets for recruiting women in senior academic positions, i.e. professorial positions. Gender Action plans in Croatia allow for temporary specific measures in order to reach the national target of 25 % women in leading positions in the public research sector.

Since 2007, the Croatian UNESCO Committee, the Ministry of Culture and L’Oréal Adria have handed out yearly awards for Women in Science in an effort to raise the awareness of excellent young female scientists and reward them for their contribution. The award also encourages female students to pursue a career in the life sciences. 

In the event of maternity leave, the Croatian Science Foundation allows candidates to postpone or pause research covered by the Foundation’s fellowships/postdoctoral grants.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Funding agencies do not put in place criteria inspired to gender equality and increased gender participation in research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated they do not include specific measures to support gender dimension in research content/programmes. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, the main reference document is the Action plan Science and Society adopted in December 2012 by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports. It proposes to equalise the gender ratio of researchers in the system, especially in management structures (minimum one third of women in national councils, regional councils, main committees, scientific and political bodies, etc.) and stresses the need for gender equality awareness increase.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 12.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

There seems to be no gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Croatia.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the Croatian Government strongly encourages open accessibility to the results of publicly funded research. The Ministry of Science, Education and Sports supported the the Croatian scientific portal, a project that marked the beginning of open access in Croatia in 2006. The Portal provides several informational services which afford open access to all scientific information resulted from public funding research, as follows: the Croatian scientific bibliography - CROSBI, the   Croatian scientific journals portal – HAMSTER and the Who's who in Croatian science.

A 2011 study of Croatian academic libraries (Hebrang-Grgić, 2011) showed that Croatian scientific community and librarians are aware of the importance of launching institutional open access (OA) repositories to enlarge optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge. This is confirmed by the Croatian Declaration of Open Access which was initiated in October 2012 and has been signed by more than 500 researchers in a couple of months.

The Immediate deposit/Optional Access (ID/OA) mandate, as well as the green open access are not regular practice in Croatia.

In Croatia, the majority of journals followed the “golden” open access road in providing digital journals, including freely available peer-reviewed articles, and the HRCAK version of an online journal is the only digital version of the journal. However, some journals have their online version independent from the HRCAK platform, and editors submit articles in HRCAK as additional copies, so this part can be considered as “green”, even though it is not submitted by the author.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

There seems to be no support to OA among funders which answered the survey. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar to that within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With regard to open access related to research data the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences participates in the project SERSCIDA – Support for Establishment of National/Regional Social Sciences Data. SERSCIDA is designed as a strategic project for supporting the cooperation and exchange of knowledge between the EU countries associated within the Council of European Social Sciences Data Archives (CESSDA) and the Western Balkan Countries (WBC) in the field of social science data archiving. The project addresses the issues of potentials of usage of information-communication technologies for the benefits of scientific research and exchange of knowledge as laid down in the call for proposals topic. The project aims to produce tangible results and improve the capacities for exchange of knowledge and data collected through research in social sciences between the European countries and WBC involved (OpenAIRE 2013).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting Open Access to data. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Institutional repositories based on open access are established by the four faculties of the University of Zagreb: the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Repository, Faculty of Organisation and Informatics, School of Medicine Repository and the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. However all repositories contain qualifying  works like PhD theses awarded by the faculty except the School of Medicine, which also contains published material by members of the Medical School, including peer-reviewed journal articles, published conference papers, books and book chapters. The three additional institutional repositories are in preparation: the Rudjer Boskovic Institute (RBI), the University of Zadar and the University of Osijek.

The most important open data repository is the Croatian Web Archive. Other open repositories are developed mainly through the e-infrastructures like the CLARIN, DARIAH, ESS, and since January 2012, SERSCIDA.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Croatia has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. However, knowledge transfer is at the heart of the Croatian Innovation policy. Croatia's system of programmes and institutions for knowledge transfer is featured by many technology transfer centres (in the university cities of Zagreb, Split, Rijeka, Osijek and Dubrovnik), out of which three are technology transfer offices (TTOS): the University of Split, the University of Zagreb and the University of Rijeka, which has grown into the Science and Technology Park (STeP) of the University of Rijeka.

The National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020, carried out by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), provides a list of five strategic pillars for the future development of the innovation system, focusing, among others, on increasing knowledge flows and interactions between the industry and the academia and securing a strong science and technology base and strengthening the capacities of research institutions for technology transfer. To date, there is no clear legal or regulatory framework covering the field of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) and technology commercialisation in universities but efforts are ongoing to create a national policy for IPR creation and management at research institutions.

Policy measures related to the intellectual property protection and patents are reasonably developed in Croatia. These activities are regulated by the Act on Patents, related Acts and fall under the responsibility of the Croatian State Intellectual Property Office (CSIPO). However, there are still modest capabilities regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) which require a systematic approach to develop the strategy and policy on this matter.

Strategic partnership between academia and industry are supported by main funding organisation in Croatian – CSF, which has since 2014 incorporated the Unity through Knowledge Fund. The latter further encouraged through the annual approval of around a dozen ‘Young Researchers and Professionals’ projects and the ‘3C Research in Industry and Academia Grants’, the competitiveness of national research at an international level and fosters research that creates new values in the Croatian economy and funds projects that help the development of research infrastructure in Croatia (Deloitte 2012).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 26.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 59.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 58.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Croatia who responded to the survey and support national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of Digital ERA, the authentication and authorization infrastructure of the Croatian research and education community is developed within the AAI@EduHr which today covers the complete Croatian research and education community. The implemented research and education network is essential to make digital services possible.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Croatia was a member of an identity federation in 2011. AAI@EduHr is the official member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable a trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations. AAI@EduHr is also a member of the global roaming service eduroam which secures, world-wide roaming access service developed for the international research and education community.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Croatia, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 44 research performing organisations in Croatia answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 102.2% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Croatia shows that 53.5 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 34.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 11.6 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 32.1 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 66.5 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.4 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

The Act amending the Act on Science and Higher Education || 2013 || X || X

Decision on Multi-annual Institutional Financing of Research Activities in Public Research Institutes and Universities 2013-2015 || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Unity through Knowledge Fund programme Cross-border grants || 2013 || X || X

National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020 (OECD) || 2010 || ||

Unit through Knowledge Fund - Guidelines and Procedures Croatian Science Foundation - Evaluation Procedure Manual || 2007 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Second Science and Technology Project || 2013 || X || X

Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (World Bank) || 2012 || X ||

The amendments to the Act on Science and Higher Education || 2013 || X || X

Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Law on the Croatian Science Foundation || 2012 || X ||

Law on Quality Assurance in Science and Higher Education || 2009 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Participation to intergovernmental organisations || || ||

IPA Programme || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Regional Research and Development Strategy for Innovation for the Western Balkans || 2010 || ||

South East Europe (SEE) 2020 Strategy || 2013 || X || X

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Establishment of the Committee for Scientific Infrastructure and preparation of the National Roadmap for Science Infrastructure || 2013 || X || X

Preparation of project pipeline for infrastructure projects for the European Regional Development Fund 2014-2020 || 2012 || X ||

Participation in ESFRI || 2010 || ||

Draft Development Plan for Scientific Infrastructure in the republic of Croatia || 2014 || X || X

Draft Development Plan for Scientific Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

EURAXESS portal || 2007 || ||

Attractive careers

Marie Sklodowska Curie COFUND_ NEWFELPRO || 2013 || X || X

Implementation of the Charter & Code principles in Croatia || 2009 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

National Policy for Gender Equality 2011-2015 || 2011 || ||

Action plan Science and Society || 2012 || X ||

National scholarship programme "For Women in Science" of the L'Oreal Adria and Croatian Commission for UNESCO || 2012 || X ||

Ordinance on the Office for Gender Equality || 2012 || X ||

The Gender Equality Act || 2008 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Croatian Declaration of Open Access to Scientific Information || 2012 || X ||

Hamster - Croatian scientific journals portal || 2006 || ||

Croatian scientific bibliography - CROSBI || 1996 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Second Science and Technology Project (STP) II || 2013 || X || X

BICRO's programmes || 2013 || X || X

Science and Innovation Investment Fund || 2009 || ||

Unit through Knowledge Fund programme "Research in industry and academia grant" || 2007 || ||

Intellectual property policy for universities and research institutions Biosciences Technology Commercialisation and Incubation Centre – BIOCentre || 2012 || X ||

Second Science and Technology Project || 2013 || X || X

National Strategy for the Croatian innovation development 2013-2020 || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

The Croatian Academic and Research Network - CARNet || 1991 || ||

Regulations on the organization of authentication and authorization infrastructure of science and higher education in Croatia- AAI@EduHr || 2008 || ||

The Croatian National Grid Infrastructure (CRO NGI) || 2007 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The key players of the Hungarian science, technology and innovation (STI) policy system are the Parliament, specifically the Education, Science, and Research Committee, the National Development Cabinet, the Ministry of National Development, the Ministry for National Economy, the Ministry of Human Resources, the National Innovation Office (NIH), and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA).

The Parliament is the highest-level political decision-making body for research and innovation. The National Development Cabinet, established in 2012 and chaired by the Prime Minister, is a high level political body in the fields of science and innovation. Notably, it is responsible for EU cofinanced projects and those with a budget over HUF 1 billion and has the mandate to coordinate governmental STI policy decisions. The National Science and Innovation Policy Board, established in 2013 and also chaired by the Prime Minister, provides support regarding strategic programmes, their long-term financing, and the evaluation of the effectiveness of the research performing institutions. At policy implementation level, the National Innovation Office (NIH) is a governmental body responsible for research, development and technological innovation, including contributions to strategy-making and programme planning as well as for international research, development and innovation (RD&I) collaboration.

The Ministry for National Economy is responsible for research, innovation and competitiveness policies. The Ministry for Human Resources is responsible for the science policy.

The MTA has three main objectives: to support and represent various scientific fields, to distribute scientific results and foster international relations in the field of sciences. Concretely, it is responsible for contributing to science policy-making and  its implementation by running the largest network of research institutes in Hungary. The MTA also allocates funds to its own research institutes and research units affiliated with universities.

The National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy (2013-2020), entitled ‘Investment into the Future’ was approved by the government in 2013. The strategy aims to raise the RD&I investments, and as a result, to mobilise the Hungarian economy and strengthen its competitiveness. The strategy set the target, amongst others, to raise the amount of research and development (R&D) expenditures to 1.8 % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and increase the number of researchers from 37 000 in 2012 to 50 000 by 2020. The strategy focuses on three main fields: knowledge creation, knowledge transfer and knowledge utilisation. The National Research and Development and Innovation Strategy is accompanied by a two year Action Plan to contribute to its implementation.

The draft Science Policy Strategy for 2014-2020 is expected to be approved in the second half of 2014. It will provide the framework for financing the academic sector and will renew the acknowledgement and publication of scientific results. Specifically, the strategy aims to increase the attractiveness of the research environment, the scientific excellence in all fields, as well as the talent management programmes to reverse the ‘brain drain.’

The draft Higher Education Strategy, to be adopted in the second half of 2014, will introduce a performance-based institutional funding model.

According to the Hungarian Partnership Agreement for the 2014-2020 programme period, Hungary will allocate 60 % of the total resources available for economic development purposes and more than EUR 2 billion for developing the knowledge economy (i.e. support of company R&D and research programmes) from Structural Funds available for this time period (about EUR 20.5 billion in total). Funds allocated through the EU Structural Funds' Operational Programmes of the New Hungary Development Plan (2007- 2013) were managed by the National Development Agency (NFU) until the end of 2013. From 1 January 2014, managing authorities in different ministries manage these funds.

In terms of RD&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Hungary represented EUR 34 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in EU-28). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7 % of total government expenditures and 0.3 % of GDP (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that, in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Hungary was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Hungary than the regression observed in the EU-28.

Tax incentives are foreseen in the National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy (2013-2020). The Government is reforming the tax system, in order to have the most competitive tax system in the region, and create the most business-friendly environment in Central and Eastern Europe. The plan includes reducing the corporate tax rate and introducing personal income tax with a single 16 % flat rate.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based funding is a major mechanism for public support to research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI) activities in Hungary. The two most important financial sources providing competitive funding for RD&I activities are the Research and Technological Innovation Fund (RTIF), and the various operational programmes of the New Széchenyi Plan co-financed by the EU Structural Funds. Relevant as well is the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) that provides financial support to basic research via competitive funding.

According to informal communication from the Hungarian Government, the share of competitive funding is about 40 % and it is expected to increase. The following are examples of new or increased sources of competitive funding:

•           An important source for competitive funding are the various operational programmes of the New Hungary Development Plan 2014-2020, co-funded by the EU Structural Funds. The most important source for R&D funding is the first priority axis of the Economic Development Operational Programme (EDOP), which supported 433 new projects in 2012 with EUR 436.2 million (funding decisions); while the amount of funding actually paid that year was EUR 391.4 million,

•           RTIF plays a significant role in the R&D funds and strategy. In 2013, the RTIF published calls for proposals worth EUR 137.4 million, while actual payments amounted to EUR 79.2 million.

•           The budget of the Momentum programme of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, which supports outstanding young researchers, increased by 20 % in 2013 compared to 2011.

•           OTKA increased its budget by 30 % in 2012 and 2013. An increased budget has come together with more calls for young researchers to launch research groups. Simultaneously, OTKA plans to raise the overhead costs, currently15 %, to support the host institutions.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 82.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The use of international peer review is not widespread. The Hungarian Academy of Science (MTA) increasingly applies this type of evaluation in its funding programmes.

New funding schemes use international peer review, like for instance the ‘Start-up_13’ scheme, launched in June 2013 to support the development of the Hungarian start-up ecosystem and more specifically the development of technology start-up companies. So far, only four companies have participated in this scheme. However, the start-up scheme consists of four phases and the second phase is foreseen to be launched in 2014. The support for building the start-up ecosystem is part of the planned Operational Programme 2014-2020.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding supported RD&I activities in higher education organisations and Public research organisations (PROs). There are two main channels for providing such funding: support for RD&I activities conducted at higher education institutes (HEIs), and support to the largest research performing organisations (RPO), the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

The share of institutional funding is of about 60 %, according to information provided by the Government.

The institutional public funding for RD&I decreased significantly in the past few years. The allocation of institutional funding to HEIs and RPOs has until now not been based on performance but on student numbers, disciplines taught, number of full time professors and number of professors holding scientific degrees. The draft Higher Education Strategy, to be adopted in 2014, will introduce a performance-based institutional funding model. Approximately one third of institutional funding will be based on scientific excellence ((30 %), even if the criteria are not yet known, whilst the remaining 70 % will still be allocated based on the number of students.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives. The role of RD&I in addressing societal challenges, and social innovation are generally perceived as not essential in Hungary. Nevertheless, a horizontal priority of the ‘National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy 2013-2020’ explicitly addresses the global social challenges and the importance of having excellent research infrastructures (Ris). In addition, the Science Policy Strategy 2014-2020, not yet approved by the Government, foresees measures within the framework of smart specialisation that should address societal challenges and give attention to social innovation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting transnational cooperation nor funding supporting joint research agendas.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme, the share of Hungary’s total participation is 1.3 % and the country received 0.7 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR-27 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4.9 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives (JPIs), Hungary participates in two of the 10 ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer) and Water Challenges for a Changing world.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so-called Article 185 initiatives), Hungary was involved in three programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives: AAL2, EMPIR and Eurostars2.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 47 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are currently still running. The country has also participated in ERA-NET Plus actions, of which are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Hungary has 36 bilateral agreements, notably with EU members, Israel, and Turkey with the primary objective to promote mobility and international cooperation, and organise science and technomgy (S&T) seminars and workshops. Hungary, represented by its National Innovation Office, also has numerous multilateral agreements, notably with NATO Research and Technology Organisation, COST, ICGEB, or EMB, amongst others.

Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 14 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters were launched, for example a cluster in energy and sustainability research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, Hungary has not developed a specific policy. In terms of implementation, it concentrates on cooperations with Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Russian Federation, South-Africa, Thailand, Ukraine, United States, and Vietnam. Hungary monitors the implementation of cooperation programmes through the S&T attachés in 11 of those countries. The attachés follow the development of RD&I trends in these countries, facilitate the establishment of bilateral agreements, encourage the networking of researchers and offer help to build partnerships.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 8.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund and the Hungarian Economy Development Centre. Two  funders apply the so called ‘lead agency’ procedure, which foresees that funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries.

In 2014, Hungary signed a Lead Agency Agreement (ARRS-OTKA), Memorandum of Understanding with Slovakia.

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for implementing joint programmes are not applied by funding agencies in the country.

Nevertheless and even though Hungary has not published a National Interoperability Strategy, the Hungarian e-Public Administration 2010 Strategy gives priority to interoperability. More specifically, the strategy proposes to update service processes, enhance the interoperability of back-office systems, and standardise related data and technology, in order to enable a transition from isolated services, based on outdated systems, to a system of shared services that build on sectoral subsystems, which covers the entire public administration domain.

Additionally, it foresees an ‘Interoperability Comprehensive Programme’, targeting the establishment of public administration services that are organised around the needs of citizens and enterprises, the implementation the of the ‘State as service provider’ model, as well as the improvement of efficiency by simplifying administration processes and taking advantage of the possibilities afforded by interoperability.

Funding agencies do not implement Money follows cooperation, a scheme which allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country.

Funding agencies do not implement Money follows researchers, a scheme that enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to original terms and objectives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Hungary allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Hungary participates in the following large international RIs: the European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), EU.XFEL and the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.7 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, ESRF, ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to developing RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, Hungary participated in the preparatory phase of 12 of them (24 %).

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these RIs, Hungary is committed to fund two of them: XFEL, ELI.

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Hungary is not involved in any of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of RIs of European interest involving several European countries.

The national roadmap on RIs is under preparation.

Despite the existence of a National Research Infrastructure Survey and Roadmap (NEKIFUT) and the decision to participate in two ESFRI infrastructures (XFEL, ELI), there is not much funding currently dedicated to RIs. Further support is foreseen for developing the national strategic research infrastructures and for Hungary's participation in ESFRI. Hungary plans to provide more funding and to participate in at least one more ESFRI project. A proposal, that includes a prioritisation of the Ris considering the Hungarian and European strategic relevance in connection to the smart specialisation strategy, will be submitted for governmental approval in 2014.

The S3 White Book, published in November 2013, foresees measures to strengthen the national RIs, although no specific RIs are mentioned in the document.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) has in place a ‘visiting scholars programme’ in place, through which prominent foreign scientists are invited to join the activities of the research institutes of the MTA.

A National Research Infrastructure register is in place and provides information on the main RIs in Hungary.

With the aim of facilitating access of foreigners to Hungarian RIs, several programmes invite outstanding foreign researchers to workshops and other activities in Hungarian RIs.

Among the RIs coordinated by Hungary, access to six of them was funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Hungary in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Hungary Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 23 019 full time equivalent (FTE)  researchers in Hungary in 2011. This represents 5.4 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared to 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 2.0 in Hungary compared to 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

In Hungary, publicly-funded research jobs are published online on the institutions’ websites and private job sites. Since 1 January 2008, open recruitment of civil servants has been required by law and institutions are obliged to publish all public research jobs on a central governmental recruitment site. Most vacancies are still advertised internally as well.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Hungarian Government actively promotes the implementation of the Charter and Code principles. Thirteen Hungarian institutions have signed the Charter and Code. Promotion of the Charter and Code as well as the R&D human resources strategy is an ongoing process, which involves both the Hungarian authorities and the Hungarian EURAXESS Office.

By May 2014, two Hungarian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which none had received the Human Resources Excellence in Research’ logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.

Hungarian higher educational institutions (HEIs)  include career development provisions for post-doctoral students with the aim of supporting and encouraging them throughout their profession. For example, the Budapest University of Technology and Economics and the University of Miskolc offer post-doctoral programmes with detailed career prospects.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25-34 was 0.8 in 2011 compared to 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

An increase in the quality of doctoral training was ensured by several programmes under the Development Plan (2007-2011) and the New Széchenyi Plan (2011-2014). These included the Research University Programme and the Hungarian Talent Programme. In addition, the Act on Higher Education (2005) further supported the strategic ambition of increasing the quality of doctoral training in Hungarian institutions. On 1 January 2012, a new Act on Higher Education came into force. The new Act on Higher Education further supports the strategic ambition of increasing the quality of doctoral training in Hungarian institutions by introducing a ranking and classification of HEIs.

The new national RDI strategy, ‘Investing in the Future – National Research and Development, Innovation Strategy 2020’ includes initiatives related to improving researchers’ employment skills and competencies. The Government Regulation on National Excellence in Higher Education foresees a set of measures to enhance the skills and competencies of researchers, to train them to adapt to the needs and demands of the changing labour market, and to ensure the next generation of adequate, well-trained R&D human resources.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 6.3 % in Hungary compared to 4.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.7 % in Hungary compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

Retaining talented researchers is a major concern and several programmes provide funding to that aim. The Momentum and Transmob-HU Programmes are the main programmes supporting researchers’ inward mobility. For instance, thanks to the Momentum programme, in 2013, 14 young scholars from among the 104 candidates were able to set up an independent research team using the total sum of HUF 633.7 million provided for the first years by the Academy. Consequently, together with the scholars who have previously received awards, 79 research teams have since the summer of 2013 been able to conduct research into promising internationally significant achievements of a total funding of nearly HUF 3 billion.

The higher education development priority of the Social Renewal Operational Programme for the period 2007-2013 (with the measures continuing into 2014) implemented measures that contribute to improving cooperation between industry and HEIs. In particular, the measure SROP 4.1.1C aimed at improving sectoral and regional cooperation at HEIs and SROP 4.2.2 A aimed at supporting high quality research in dominant fields of research in Hungary. Both measures promoted the importance of inter-sectoral cooperation.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Hungary has not set up specific gender provisions or actions in the field of public research. However, the National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality – Guidelines and Objectives 2010-2021 aims to increase the proportion of women in leading positions in both the public and private sectors by one third by the end of the period.

At institutional level, some scientific institutions have put in place programmes to increase women’s participation in science. For example, the Chemical Research Centre in the Hungarian Academy of Sciences has a project to increase the visibility of science careers for women.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey did not indicate support to gender equality in public research.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

The country has measures supporting return after parental leave.

The Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) introduced in 2012 a framework programme for equal opportunities that allows female researchers with children under 10 years old to apply for grants over a two-year age limit compared to male researchers. The Economic Development Operational Programme aims to create work place environments that ensure equal opportunities for efficient work for female employees or employees who return to the labour market after a period of receiving child care fees (GYED) or child care benefits (GYES), and help integrate these groups into the labour market. The Economic Development Operational Programme aims to create work place environments that ensure equal opportunities for efficient work for female employees or employees who return to the labour market after a period of receiving child care fees (GYED) or child care benefits (GYES), and help integrate these groups into the labour market.

In the 2012 Labour Code the position of women on maternity leave is safeguarded and the restoration of the same position after maternity leave is guaranteed.

Since January 2013, a new scheme is in force to foster the employment of highly-educated, PhD-graduated researchers. It consists of a tax incentive for the employer. The Hungarian Government also introduced the so-called ‘GYEDextra’ which allows female employees to receive child care (GYED) in addition to the salary when returning to the labour market.

It has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically support female researchers.

The L’ORÉAL-UNESCO Hungarian Grant for Women and Science provides financial support to young female scientists in the field of natural sciences. The financial allocation is EUR 11 000 per year. The MTA has a special prize for female researchers, which is awarded annually at the ‘Week of Hungarian Science.’ In addition, several universities give prizes to female researchers.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 61.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

Hungary has not integrated the gender dimension in research programmes and has not dedicated budgets or programmes to women/gender studies.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey did not indicate support to the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, Hungary has not set up quotas for the participation of the under-represented gender in decision making bodies of RPOs.

Balanced gender representation within recruitment committees and gender quotas have been discussed in order to reduce the gap between the representation of men and women in various professions and bodies, but explicit measures were not identified.

In 2010, the share of the under-represented gender participating in (a) committees establishing research priorities and policies and in (b) boards designing / defining national research priorities and policies was 18 %.

Most Hungarian universities have developed general and non-exhaustive equality plans. Some universities have more developed plans, such as the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. For instance, this university organises information sessions on engineering and informatics science for high school girls with the aim of increasing the numbers of female students in the departments where there are more men than women.

The National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality – Guidelines and Objectives 2010-2021 aims to increase the proportion of women in leading positions in both the public and private sectors by one third by the end of the period.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 81.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Hungary is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

There are no specific Hungarian policy measures aimed at enhancing open access (OA) to publications or data. But some institutions, like the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, apply OA measures.

OA is receiving growing attention in Hungary. However, three obstacles remain for the implementation of OA:  the inexistence of a national OA strategy, the general lack of awareness about copyright and digital issues and the resistance by researchers to allocate time and effort to the depositing process.

The President of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) issued an 'Open Access Mandate', according to which researchers and employees of the MTA should make their scientific publications open access.

In 2008 the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, and scientific publications resulting from an OTKA grant have to be made freely available.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support OA to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

There are no policies or measures in place to support OA to data in Hungary.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 77.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support OA to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, the HUNOR (Hungarian Open Repositories) consortium was established by the libraries of the Hungarian HEIs and the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to advance national open access practices.

The Corvinus University, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and University of Debrecen are members of the ‘Confederation of Open Access Repositories’ (COAR) that promote OA to publications.

Various online portals, such as the Hungarian National Scientific Bibliography, REAL (repository of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences' Library) or the Hungarian Open Access Journals portal, have been put in place to give free access to publications, journals and information about Hungarian researchers.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Hungary has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy, but the National Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2020 (RD&I Strategy) specifically supports efficient knowledge and technology transfer collaborations.

Between 2006 and 2012, 15 technology transfer offices (TTOs) were established in major universities and colleges to support researchers with their patent applications, licencing and exploitation of research results, as well as with fundraising activities. The TTOs were set up with EU funds and do not yet have the capacity to mediate efficiently between academia and business.

In 2013, there were discussions between the National Innovation Office and key stakeholders in order to formulate a national policy to promote knowledge transfer. The main outcome of the discussions is a plan to redesign the scheme used by TTOs at major universities, but not much funding is available for these offices.

Only 6 % of Hungarian researchers at HEIs have previously been employed in both the private and the public sector, which is roughly one third of the EU-27 average, according to the MORE Report. No specific incentives are provided to increase this number.

A 2012 regulation introduced mechanisms for the protecting and managing of intellectual property rights (IPR) of research outputs, ensuring that the patent rights of institutional and employee inventions created in research centres belong to these centres.

The 2013 EU country-specific-recommendation (CSR) emphasised the need ‘to provide targeted incentives to support innovative enterprises.’ In response to it, Hungary is developing a second set of administrative burden reduction measures for enterprises, as a follow up of the 2011 ‘Cutting Red Tape Programme’. In addition, the Act on Public Procurement was amended in 2013 on several points to boost market competition and ensure greater transparency.

Funding organisations do not have specific funding lines dedicated to implementing knowledge transfer.

The National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) provides the framework for developing and operating the research network in Hungary. In concrete terms, it provides an integrated computer networking infrastructure and, on the basis of that, a wide range of communication, information, and cooperation services, leading-edge environment for networking applications, as well as advanced framework for generating and providing content. Hungary is member of EDUgain through eduId.hu. HUNGARNet is the Hungarian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 22.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 58.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 56.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Hungary who responded to the survey and support national support to knowledge transfer and open innovation, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share is quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster. The share is also quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to implemeting the Digital ERA, Hungary has prepared a National Strategy and an Action Plan. Hungary has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible. HUNGARNet is the Hungarian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

The National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) provides the framework for the development and operation of the research network in Hungary. In concrete terms, it provides an integrated computer networking infrastructure and, on the basis of that, a wide range of communication, information, and cooperation services, leading-edge environment for networking applications, as well as an advanced framework for content generation and provision.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, premium services.

Concerning digital services, the Commission could not identify support to their provision.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 63.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Hungary was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. Hungary is member of EDUgain through eduId.hu, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and autorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partner federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Hungary, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 23 research performing organisations in Hungary answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 14.4 % of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Hungary shows that 22.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 59.1 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 18.2 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 54.0 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 40.3 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Hungarian smart specialization strategy || || ||

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Action Plan of the Innovation Strategy || || ||

Competitive funding : Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) Research and Technological Innovation Fund (KTIA) || 1990 || ||

Research and development and innovation support scheme || || ||

Start-up 2013 scheme to provide Accredited Technological Incubator titles || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Support to RTDI umbrella projects || 2012 || X ||

Support to innovation and technology parks || 2007 || ||

EEA Financial Mechanism 2009-2014, Norway Grants || 2009 || ||

"National Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2020" || 2013 || X || X

Science Policy Strategy || 2014 || X || X

Draft Higher Education Strategy || 2014 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Support for fundamental and applied research projects to be implemented in international collaboration || 2007 || ||

Draft Science Policy Strategy || 2014 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Visiting scholars programme || || ||

Hungarian Academy of Sciences joined the initiative of Teaming for Excellence || 2013 || X || X

"Invitation 13" competition || 2013 || X || X

S3 White Book || 2013 || X || X

Draft Interoperability Comprehensive Programme || 2014 || X || X

The Hungarian e-Public Administration Strategy gives priority to interoperability || 2010 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Participation in ELI (Extreme Light Infrastructure) laser research centre || 2013 || X || X

National Research Infrastructure Survey and Roadmap || 2008 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Research Infrastructure register || 2012 || X ||

Stipendium Hungaricum || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Momentum programme || 2009 || ||

"Bolyai Janos" Research Scholarship || 1997 || ||

“National Excellence Programme - establishment and operation of a domestic system providing support to students and researchers” || 2012 || X ||

Attractive careers

EURAXESS Hungary - Hungarian Mobility Centre || 2008 || ||

Hungarian Rectors Conference || || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

L’ORÉAL-UNESCO Hungarian Grant for Women and Science || 2003 || ||

Prize from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) for female researchers || || ||

Scheme to foster the employment of  PhD-graduated researchers, consisting of tax incentives for the employer || 2013 || X || X

Child care support 'GYEDextra' || 2013 || X || X

Gender balance in the decision-making process

New Labour Code || 2012 || X ||

Framework programme for equal opportunities from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA) || 2012 || X ||

 Economic Development Operational Programme || 2013 || X || X

National Strategy for the Promotion of Gender Equality – Guidelines and Objectives 2010-2021 || 2010 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Hungarian National Scientific Bibliography || 2010 || ||

National Programme for Electronic Information Provision || || ||

REAL - Repository of the Hungarian Academy of Science's Library || || ||

Hungarian Open Access Journals || || ||

Videotorium is a a video/audio sharing portal || 2010 || ||

Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) in Hungary || || ||

Hungarian Open Repositories consortium (HUNOR) established by libraries || || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

University technology transfer offices || 2013 || X || X

Regulation on protecting and managing intellectual property || 2012 || X ||

Discussions with key stakeholders in order to formulate a national policy to promote knowledge transfer || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

National Information Infrastructure Development (NIIF) || 1990 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN || || ||

Digital ERA - National Strategy and an Action Plan || 2013 || X || X

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation (R&I) (policy is coordinated by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.The Department of Education and Skills is responsible for, inter alia, core funding and overarching policy development, including research policy, for the higher education sector. Forfás, an agency of the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, acts as policy advisory board for enterprise, trade, science, technology and innovation.

Key implementing bodies include Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland, under the aegis of the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; as well as the Higher Education Authority (HEA) and the Irish Research Council (IRC) under the aegis of the Department of Education and Skills. The SFI is the national foundation for investment in scientific and engineering research. The legislation to extend its mandate to allow it to fund applied as well as oriented basic research in institutions in strategic areas of opportunity entered into force in November 2013. The IRC focuses on the cultivation of skills and research expertise to address broad societal needs. It provides funds across all disciplines and focuses on early stage career researchers.

Since March 2012 the National Research Prioritisation Exercise is being implemented on a cross-Government basis. It prioritises competitive exchequer funding in 14 priority areas and six underpinning platform technologies. The Action Plan for Jobs, updated annually presents a set of measures to drive job creation, among which there is a section specifying several actions in the area of R&I.

The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, also adopted in 2012, establishes a new performance framework for Irish higher education institutions (HEIs). This is monitored and advanced by way of the Strategic Dialogue process now in place between the HEA and the HEIs. This is the central means through which the institutions will develop their future performance in accordance with national economic and societal objectives.  The imperative to maximise Ireland’s return on investment in research is explicitly emphasised in the Higher Education System Performance Framework 2014-16 under System Level Objective 4: To maintain an open and excellent public research system focused on the Government’s priority areas and the achievement of other societal objectives and to maximise research collaborations and knowledge exchange between and among public and private sector research actors.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Ireland represented EUR 165 per inhabitant in 2012, slightly below the EU-28 (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1 % of total government expenditures and 0.5 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Ireland was higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. However, in terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Ireland, measured as a percentage of public government expenditure, evolved more negatively than the negative evolution observed in the EU-27. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Ireland than in EU-28.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The Research Prioritisation: A Framework for Monitoring Public Investment in Science, Technology and Innovation adopted in 2013 sets out a framework of metrics and targets for monitoring the impact of public investment in Science, Technology and Innovation in the context of the research prioritisation strategy. The framework identifies deliverables and targets for individual research funding agencies such as SFI, Enterprise Ireland and the Health Research Board. It specifies that funding agencies should apply where appropriate, standardised principles for assessing research proposals (stage-gate, international peer review).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 78.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are extensively used by major R&D funding agencies such as Science Foundation Ireland and the Higher Education Authority since 2000.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is partly allocated by HEA based on institutional assessment of universities, institutes of technology and other designated colleges using different methods, which depend on the use of the funding. A proportion of institutional funding (i.e. that part of an academic's work that involves research) is attributed by the universities to research. The allocation of the core grant is determined on a formula basis. A further weighting is given for research students. Five per cent of the core allocation is top-sliced and allocated on the basis of research criteria (degrees awarded and contract research income per academic staff).

The 'National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030', has introduced a new performance framework within which publicly-funded higher education institutions are being held accountable to the Government for their performance against defined national priorities, including specifically System Level Objective 4 regarding the development of the Irish public research system.

Funding for public research performing organisations (RPOs) is provided annually on the basis of negotiations by individual public research organisations with their parent department (ministry).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for allocating institutional funding is lower than the EU average. This result may not reflect the situation in Ireland, as the amount of institutional funding allocated by survey respondents appears to be quite low.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives. The national research prioritisation strategy is aligned with the grand challenges identified at European level to be addressed through optimal transnational co-operation and competition. The Science Foundation Ireland Agenda 2020 highlights the ambitions of Ireland in terms of transnational and international cooperation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Ireland allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Ireland dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States (MS), Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), Ireland's total share of participation was 1.7 % and the country received 1.5 % of total EC contribution. FP funding represents EUR 115 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period). In December 2013, the Government published the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020): Ireland's Strategy and Target for Participation, which sets out the Government's commitment to ensure strong participation by Irish researchers and companies in Horizon 2020, with a target of winning EUR 1.25 billion over the programme period.

Concerning joint programming initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in nine of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several MS (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in four programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is involved in all initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 47 ERA-NETs, of which 11 are currently still running. The country also has participated in four ERA-NET Plus actions, - of which two are still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU MS and/or Associated Countries, the Irish Research Council forms part of a network of Research Councils across Europe that allows countries to relate to each other and collaborate on research agendas, and it does so particularly in the domains of the humanities and social sciences where it has a particular national mandate. The amended legislation governing Science Foundation Ireland, enacted in 2013, provides the legal basis for funding research activities in priority strategic areas, notably with Northern Ireland.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the Irish Research Council is committed through its membership of Science Europe and the European Science Foundation to integrating Irish research in European and international networks of expertise. Besides, the International Strategic Cooperation Award (ISCA) programme of Science Foundation Ireland supports research-based collaborations between Ireland’s HEIs and partner organisations in designated countries, currently Brazil, China, India, and Japan. The United States-Ireland R&D Partnership Programme, involving collaboration between the United States (National Science Foundation), Ireland (Science Foundation Ireland) and Northern Ireland (Invest Northern Ireland and Department for Employment and Learning), partners scientists and engineers across academia and industry to address crucial research questions; to foster new and existing industrial research activity that could make an important contribution to the respective economies; and to expand educational and research career opportunities in science and engineering.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Actions to support the interoperability of Irish programmes with other agencies are mostly linked with specific bilateral or multilateral activities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 39 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Ireland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is lower than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Ireland participates in the following large international research infrastructures (RIs): The European Space Agency (ESA), the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA) and the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL). In 2012, the country contributed 0.2 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by the EMBL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participating in the development of RIs included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participated in the preparatory phase of eight (16 %) of them. In terms of financial commitments developing these RIs, Ireland is committed to fund five of them. They are CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, ESSurvey, EURO ARGO and PRACE (ex HPC).

With regards to participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortiums (ERIC), Ireland has participated since May 2013 in the ESS ERIC, one of the seven consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of Ris of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to developing and implementing RIs, their development has been a key element of national STI strategies. The national roadmap was published in 2007. The Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI) has been a major funding vehicle to facilitate HEIs to invest in new facilities. The fifth and current cycle of the programme covering the period 2010-2015 will involve an estimated investment of EUR 348 million in the higher education sector dealing with a range of projects including infrastructure. Science Foundation Ireland launched the last of its most recent funding call for research infrastructures in 2012. It was influenced by the ESFRI roadmap, as was the PRTLI before it. In 2013, Science Foundation Ireland’s developed Ris as part of its SFI Research Centres Programme 2013 that provides for funding of associated Ris.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Ireland endorses the facilitation of trans-national access to infrastructures (in person and remotely). It also devotes significant resources to helping researchers to secure right of access to specialist facilities in Europe, particularly those linked to Ireland’s research priorities and/or relevant to enterprise goals. The Higher Education Authority published guidelines in 2013 on access to RIs within publicly-funded institutions together with a searchable database of infrastructures (LIRE - Large Items of Research Infrastructure), which will be accessible to public and private sector entities.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Ireland in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Ireland_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 15,172 FTE researchers in Ireland in 2011. This represents 7.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 105 in Ireland compared to 72 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 71 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Across the seven universities, positions for research profiles R2-R4, and many at R1, are advertised internationally and recruitment is based on the quality of the candidates. In 2011, the ratio of international academic staff ranged from 26% to 42% across the universities. In the last quarter of 2014, the seven universities collaborated in developing a new e-recruitment system www.universityvacancies.com to provide greater global visibility for university jobs. Depending on the success of the portal, the system may be rolled out to other HEIs.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

All seven Irish universities and some Institutes of Technology (IoTs) have voluntarily signed up to the EU Charter and Code and thus operate a policy of open recruitment. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) also applies criteria for research grant funding based on the Charter and Code. 

By May 2014, 16 Irish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which five had received the Human Resources Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter and Code.

The majority of universities in Ireland have introduced their own research career structure (e.g. in some cases, the post-doctorate phase is limited to four to five years in order to ensure the researcher’s progress). Progression to a more senior role depends on the ability of individuals to compete for work and win research grants. Permanent academic positions are filled through open international recruitment. In 2013, the EURAXESS Ireland website developed a specific landing page for those interested in studying for a PhD in Ireland.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged between 25 and 34 was 1.9 in 2011 compared to 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

To achieve the objective of developing PhD graduates with the skills necessary to develop and manage their careers across a broad range of employment sectors, including academia, universities are providing more structured support for students, incorporating research and generic skills development opportunities. The seven Irish universities, the Institutes of Technology and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland are committed to strengthening their graduate research capacity with a concomitant increase in graduate students. The majority of Irish HEIs have introduced structured PhD frameworks. The key principle underpinning the Irish structured PhD is a series of measures to ensure high-quality supervision, support and an ongoing assessment of the progress of the candidate, with a particular emphasis on providing training and coursework, at disciplinary level and with a view to developing generic and transferable skills.

The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 recommends that a consistent quality framework be developed for Irish PhD education, based on critical mass. The HEA and Irish Research Council completed the framework in 2014 and will work with HEIs to ensure greater consolidation and collaboration among HEIs and funders. The HEA has a particular focus on supporting and enhancing human capital development, mostly at graduate level through policy drive and support for a doctoral education system characterised by a structured PhD model.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 MS was 16.9 % in Ireland compared to 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.5 % in Ireland compared with 16.9% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

There are no nationalities restrictions associated with applying for either research funding or research positions in Ireland. As an example, the post-doctoral fellowships offered by the Irish Research Council are open to researchers of all nationalities, including those who are resident outside Ireland at the time of application.

To facilitate the inward migration of Third Country researchers, Ireland has implemented the Hosting Agreement (the Scientific Visa) scheme. By availing itself of a hosting agreement, researcher entry visas are fast-tracked and researchers can work in Ireland without recourse to the usual work permit or Green Card. This scheme also allows the researcher’s immediate family to live in Ireland for the duration of the contract, and entitles the spouse and dependents to apply for a work permit allowing greater ease of access to employment in Ireland. This has most certainly helped in attracting non-EU researchers to both the public and private sectors. Between the commencement of the scheme in October 2007 and December 2013, the EURAXESS office processed nearly 2 200 Hosting Agreements with a total of 42 accredited organisations.

The Irish Government places a strong emphasis on industry-academia collaboration. The national funding agencies for R&I to promote collaboration between academia and industry. The Research Prioritisation Exercise (ongoing, having commenced in 2012) involves a significantly enhanced focus on collaborative research with enterprise and on commercialisation of research by growing the number of researchers in enterprises and enhancing the flow of researchers between academia and enterprise. The Irish Research Council (IRC) has secured Commission co-funding to develop the ELEVATE scheme (2013-2018). This scheme will allow experienced researchers to spend two years at an enterprise/industry host laboratory outside Ireland, followed by a return year at an Irish HEI.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Ireland has extensive and wide-ranging comprehensive employment equality legislation, i.e. Employment Equality Act, 1998 and Equal Status Act, 2000.  Ireland is involved in European initiatives targeting institutional transformation in gender equality and a significant momentum on this front can be observed nationally with the establishment of a National Network for Gender Equality in Academic and Research Careers. In November 2012 the ‘Recommendations for Actions towards Gender Equality in Academic and Research Careers in the Higher Education Sector’ were published. They formalise a system of national collaboration to drive forward structural change.

Other actions address gender equality in research. For example, the Women in Technology and Science (WITS) network was established in 1990 to actively promote women’s participation in science and technology; and the Centre for Women in Science & Engineering Research (WiSER) in Trinity College, Dublin seeks to develop sustainable practices to ensure that women can compete in research on an equal basis using their scientific expertise, knowledge and potential. Also, SFI funded a number of programmes that sought to encourage the entry of women into science and technology and to facilitate researchers (male and female) to resume their careers after family care breaks, notably the Principal Investigators Programme. The Irish Research Council is a partner, along with Intel and Accenture, in the Women Invent Tomorrow initiative organised by Silicon Republic, which seeks to champion the role of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Ireland has also set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to specifically support female researchers.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 45.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 27.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

However, the share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The funding agencies have launched initiatives to address gender inequality in the research sector, particularly in terms of the low numbers of female researchers in science, engineering and technology and the low percentage of female Principal Investigators. In 2013, Science Foundation Ireland published a set of new Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) one of which is to increase the representation of women in science, engineering and technology (SET). Two targets have been identified in relation to this KPI:  Increased employment of women in Irish based SET industries — 10 % increase from 2013 baseline; and 2.25 % of SFI award holders by 2020.

In 2013, SFI announced the launch of its Advance Fellowship Award. The aim of this scheme is to improve the representation and career progression of women in science, engineering and technology in Ireland.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 45.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

In terms of inclusion of the gender dimension in research content and/or programmes, the Irish Research Council published in 2013 its Gender Strategy and Action Plan in 2013-2020, which, inter alia, requires researchers to consider whether a sex and/or gender dimension is potentially relevant to their research content and fully integrate sex/gender analysis where relevant, thereby ensuring maximum impact, societal benefit and optimising innovation in Irish research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 7.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 45.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

However, within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, in 1995 the Irish Government introduced a requirement for a minimum of 40 % of women and men appointed to all State boards. However, government targets in relation to the gender composition in State boards do not apply to universities which are non-governmental organisations. The Irish Research Council with its Gender Strategy & Action Plan 2013-2020 aims for balance (at least 40 % of each gender to be represented) in the membership of all assessment, advisory and management boards, committees, workshops, focus groups, etc.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 56.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than that within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Ireland is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the statement presenting the National principles for open access policy provides the overall framework in support of open access to scientific publications. The National Steering Committee on open access focuses on its operationalisation. It seeks to encourage all publication repository holders to adhere to the open access principles outlined in the statement and plans to issue regular statements on its progress in achieving its goals. The national portal for open access to Irish published research (RIAN) provides a single point of access to national research publications, and contains content harvested from the institutional repositories of the seven universities and Dublin Institute of Technology.

Related to open access to publications, Ireland has decided to pursue the green open access route.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 59.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in open access amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the national principles for open access policy also address research data.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 79.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support open access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, a number of digital repositories have been developed with public funding including the Digital Repository of Ireland and the Digital Humanities Observatory. Digital Humanities is central to one of Ireland's 14 national research priority areas: Digital Platforms, Content & Applications.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, several actions support transferring research outcomes to the market. Ireland is well advanced in implementing the Commission Recommendation on knowledge transfer (COM (2008) 1329 final). A joint Enterprise Ireland – IDA Ireland Technology Centres programme supports 14 industry-led research centres (Technology Centres), which are undertaking research in specific areas. Generally, the centres are based in a university with support from partner universities to deliver on the research needs of enterprise. Through Enterprise Ireland, the Government organisation responsible for the development and growth of Irish enterprises in world markets, support is provided for the commercialisation of academic research and collaboration with industry and there are a number of other supports to directly assist companies with R&I activities that will lead to job creation and increased exports.

With a view to further driving the commercialisation of publicly-funded research, a new national Intellectual Property (IP) Protocol is helping to provide industry with easier access to IP arising from publicly-funded research. A key initiative linked to the IP Protocol is the new central Technology Transfer Office (cTTO) located in Enterprise Ireland, which is providing a crucial interface between industry and the research community and is helping to drive a world class technology transfer system in Ireland, ensuring it is responsive to the needs of both academia and enterprise. The cTTO plays a key role in the Irish innovation system by providing a responsive interface between companies and the wealth of technology, skills and 'know how' available in the higher education system. One of the many functions of the new office is providing a central hub that will enable companies to explore, through a web interface, the research resources available to them throughout Ireland.

The Industrial Development Agency (IDA) Ireland has a key role in seeking to win high-value R&D investments for Ireland, by promoting collaboration between industry, academia, government agencies and regulatory authorities. It also funds in-company R&D. Ireland’s strengthened national research ecosystem has enhanced IDA’s capacity to attract increased levels of high-value R&D projects, which qualitatively transform and deepen the roots of key multinationals. In addition, Science Foundation Ireland launched the SFI Research Centres Programme 2013. The programme seeks to consolidate research activities across higher education institutions to create a critical mass of internationally-leading researchers in strategic areas, which become a key attraction to industry and lay the foundation for effective and productive academic and industrial partnerships.

Finally, the Higher Education System Performance Framework 2014-16 explicitly monitors and strategically highlights knowledge transfer under System Level Objective 4.  The HEA’s recent publication of institutional profiles also explicitly draws attention to institutions’ performance in knowledge transfer.  These profiles will be updated and published on an annual basis.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 84.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Ireland who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to implementing the Digital ERA, Ireland has set up HEANnet, established in 1983 by the Irish universities with the support of the Higher Education authority, provides a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible. HEAnet e-infrastructure services underpin academic research and education activity in Ireland with approximately 200 000 HEI staff and students relying on the its IT network. Ireland is committed to providing e-infrastructures particularly for the arts, social sciences and humanities.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, premium services such as security audits.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Ireland was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable a trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partner federations. HEAnet is the main promoter of the Identity Federation across the Irish education and research sector. As part of its Strategic Plan 2014-2017, it is seeking to expand the Edugate service to all its client institutions.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 68.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Ireland, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 13 research performing organisations in Ireland answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 8.5% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Ireland shows that 42.9 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 42.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 14.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 92.5 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 6.4 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.2 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

The results for the indicator "share of institutional funding allocated based on institutional assessment and(or evaluation" (section 1.3) may not reflect the accurate situation in Ireland, as the amount of institutional funding allocated by survey respondents appears to be quite low.

Also, it should be mentioned that several organisations did not provided information for an accurate estimation of the indicator "Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents)".

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Strategy for Science,Technology and Innovation 2006 - 2013 || 2006 || ||

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Research Prioritisation: A Framework for Monitoring Public Investment in Science, Technology and Innovation || 2013 || X || X

National research and innovation programmes || || ||

Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act || 2003 || ||

National Research Prioritisation Strategy - Actions Plans for 14 priority areas || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 || 2012 || X ||

New Landscape for Higher Education || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020): Ireland's Strategy and Target for Participation || 2013 || X || X

Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) (Amendment) Act 2013 || 2013 || X || X

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Science Foundation Ireland: Agenda 2020 - 2013 Review || 2013 || X || X

SFI International Strategic Cooperation Award || 2013 || X || X

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

SFI Research Centres Programme 2013 || 2013 || X || X

National research infrastructure roadmap || 2007 || ||

Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (fifth cycle) || 2010 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Guidelines For Access By Researchers To Research Infrastructure Hosted By Higher Education Institutions Or Other Research Bodies In Ireland || 2013 || X || X

Draft Consultation Paper on Access by Researchers to Large-Scale Research Infrastructures and Facilities in Ireland || 2012 || X ||

Attractive careers

Irish EURAXESS Office || 2004 || ||

Researcher hosting agreement scheme || 2007 || ||

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Irish Research Council Employment Based Postgraduate Programme (Industrial PhDs and Masters) || 2013 || X || X

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Irish Research Council's Gender Strategy and Action Plan in 2013 || 2013 || X || X

SFI Advanced Fellowship Programme || 2013 || X || X

Science Foundation Ireland: Agenda 2020 - 2013 Review || 2013 || X || X

Employment equality legislative framework || || ||

SFI principal investigator career advancement (PICA) SFI Investigator career advancement (ICA) || 2005 || ||

Institute Planning Grant Institute Development Award || || ||

Government decision S21590E || 1995 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

National Principles for Open Access Policy Statement || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

SFI Research Centres Programme 2013 || 2013 || X || X

Intellectual Property Protocol || 2012 || X ||

Irish Research Council Starter Grants || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

DARIAH consortium || || ||

Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI) || 2006 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

HEAnet Strategic Plan 2014-2017 || 2013 || X || X

Eduroam || 2009 || ||

eduGAIN || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry for Education, Universities and Research (MIUR), which coordinates scientific activities, supervises the academic system, funds universities and research agencies, and supports public and private research and technological development. MIUR is also in charge of preparing the National Research Programme (PNR). The overall coordination of science and technology (S&T) policy falls under the remit of the Inter-ministry Committee for Economic Planning (CIPE). MIUR and the Ministry for Economic Development (MISE) – through its Department of Development and Social Cohesion (DPS) – jointly coordinate Italy’s participation in Horizon 2020 and coordinate the smart specialisation strategy. Other ministries (Health, Agriculture, Defence, etc) manage research funds in their specific fields, whilst regions are also involved in research and innovation (R&I). Universities and public research organisations (PROs) are the core performers of the public research sector. The Council of National Research (CNR) is the largest research performing organisation (RPO) operating under the supervision of the MIUR.

Horizon Italia 2020 (HIT2020), published by MIUR in March 2013, is the key document outlining Italy’s research and innovation strategy between 2014 and 2020. It aims at increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of R&I investments and presents a multiannual research and innovation strategy aligned with the Europe2020 Strategy and Horizon 2020. HIT2020 will be implemented through the National Research Programme 2014-2020, which was published in February 2014.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Italy represented EUR 148 per inhabitant in 2012. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government expenditures and 0.6 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in Italy has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU's GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Italy than in the EU-28.

According to the 2014 National Reform Programme, tax incentives for SMEs offering long-term contracts to researchers and vouchers covering up to 60 % of costs related to R&D activities will be provided through the National Operational Programme (PON) Research and Innovation and the PON Enterprise and Competitiveness. Tax credits on 50 % of R&D expenditure are also available between 2014 and 2016 for businesses investing in R&D.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Concerning project-based funding, it is allocated by MIUR through the PRIN (National Interest Research Programme) and FIRB (Basic Research Investment Fund) programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 51.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are increasingly used. International peer review were introduced by Law No134/2012 and further reinforced by HIT2020, according to which peer review shall be used for all project-based funding. Peer review with the involvement of foreign experts has been implemented for the main calls managed by the MUIR (e.g. FIRB, PRIN, Smart Cities and CLUSTER). According to the 2014 measure by MIUR, peer review will be adopted for the entire research system.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is now increasingly allocated based on institutional assessment. The 2009 and 2010 laws have reformed the formula for institutional funding for universities and public research organisations (the ordinary fund for university funding, FFO, and the ordinary fund for the funding of research organisations funding, FOE). Approximately 16 % of institutional funding allocated in 2014 is determined based on institutional assessment (quota premiale) and linked to the results of the 2013 quality assessment review carried out by the National Evaluation Agency for the University and Research Sector (ANVUR). Several of the indicators used for the evaluation by ANVUR are research-related (i.e. scientific publications, international collaborations and funds obtained from competitive calls). This share is forecast to increase to 18 % and 20 % in 2015 and 2016 respectively. This new funding formula is expected to reward well-performing universities, whilst cuts to the least performing universities will be gradual. This reform is in line with the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation which highlighted the need to ensure that public funding better rewards the quality of higher education and research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 35.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is higher than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Several measures have been adopted to promote Italy’s participation in joint research. HIT 2020 and the National Research Programme (2014-2020) emphasise the need to focus R&D efforts on societal challenges, in line with Italy’s smart specialisation strategy and Horizon 2020. The strategic document by MIUR ‘Atto di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per l’anno 2014’ (2014) identifies as a priority the support to the internationalisation of the research system, including the promotion of ERA and joint programming with EU MS. The implementation of joint research will be supported through the programme ‘Support to joint programming’, as announced in the 2014 National Reform Programme.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Italy allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Italy dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Italy's participation in the total participation is 10.1 % and the country received 9.4 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 57 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.5 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all of the ten ongoing initiatives, and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe, Water Challenges for a Changing world, Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 86 ERA-NETs, of which 29 are currently still running. The country also has participated in five ERA-NET Plus actions– of which two are still running – in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Italy allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards will be increasingly used in Italy. Law 4/2012 and 134/2012 provide the legal basis for the domestic recognition of evaluation of international research projects selected by EU programmes. The Operational procedures 556/2013 support the recognition of ex-ante and interim international evaluation of projects; however it does not apply to the recognition of ex-post evaluations.

Regarding the interoperability of programmes, Law 4/2012 has introduced several changes to eligibility definitions and eligibility of costs as well as the simplification of rules of research projects with a view to align national practice with EU legislation and practice.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 71.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Italy allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

IT participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO, ESRF, EU.XFEL and ILL.

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 30 of them (61%). The country coordinates four of them: EMSO, EMBRC, EUROFEL (ex IRUVX-FEL), KM3NeT.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, Italy is committed to funding 16 of them. They are: SHARE-ERIC, EMSO, EURO ARGO, LIFEWATCH, IFMIF/EVEDA, ECRIN, INFRAFRONTIER, INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, EUROFEL (ex IRUVX-FEL), ESSneutron, XFEL, ILL 20/20, KM3NeT, SKA, and PRACE (ex HPC).

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Italy hosts CERIC ERIC and participates in five (SHARE ERIC, EATRIS ERIC, BBMRI ERIC, ECRIN ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC) of the seven consortiums which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of Research Infrastructures, the 2014 National Reform Programme reiterates the need to strengthen and consolidate major infrastructures, notably with regard to ERICs (European Research Infrastructure Consortia). An update of the national roadmap of research infrastructures of pan-European interest took place in 2010. The roadmap includes references to Italy’s participation in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. In addition, HIT2020 provides guidelines for identifying strategic research infrastructures in line with ESFRI criteria and for the definition of a national plan for research infrastructures. The Italian strategy focuses by and large on the adoption of smart specialisation for selecting regions for research infrastructures and on increased integration at EU level of selected research infrastructures (as opposed to developing more research infrastructures). In terms of funding, the ordinary fund for research institutes (FOE) constitutes the main source for financing research infrastructures on the Italian territory. According to the National Research Programme 2014-2020, some EUR 185 million per year will be earmarked as part of the Programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ for the construction and upgrade of infrastructures.  In HIT2020, the setting up of a specific fund for financing research infrastructures is foreseen, however it is not clear whether a timeframe and budget line have been identified. Italy contributes to the construction of new pan-European RIs with EUR 90 million each year budgeted in FOE. However, the actual FOE allocations to ESFRI in the last three years have been lower (approximately Euro 44 million in 2011, Euro 56 million in 2012 and Euro 69 million in 2013).

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Several measures supporting researchers’ access to research infrastructures are foreseen as part of the National Research Programme 2014-2020 and HIT 2020. According to the National Research Programme 2014-2020 and the 2014 National Reform Programme, the programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ will facilitate researchers’ access to infrastructures. HIT2020 also envisages support to researchers’ mobility across pan-European research infrastructures. Law 35/2012 and Law 134/2012 removed some barriers to researchers’ access to research infrastructures. Law 35/2012 allows researchers from higher education institutions (HEIs) and RPOs participating in international projects to leave their employer for the whole duration of the project or for a maximum period of five years. However, certain categories of researchers (e.g. fixed-term researchers, researcher with atypical contracts, researchers employed by PROs not under MIUR control) are excluded from this provision.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Italy in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Italy _Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 103,424 FTE researchers in Italy in 2011. This represents 4.1 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 23.2 in Italy compared with 22.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 31 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Law 240/2010 promotes an open and transparent recruitment system. Although the level of openness and transparency is not yet fully in line with the principles of the ‘Charter &Code’, the process is under way and this has been proved by the constantly growing number of research institutions interested in joining the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers process. In addition, universities and public research organisations are requested to publish their research grant offers on the EURAXESS jobs portal. In 2013 this obligation was also extended to doctoral (PhD) fellowships.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Charter & Code principles are referred to in several Articles of Law 240/2010. However, they are merely promoted based on an ‘encouragement to comply’ rather than a mandatory obligation.

By May 2014, 19 Italian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers, of which seven had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The ratio of R&D investment to GDP is lower than the average in other countries. The Italian government has introduced fiscal incentives for the private sector to invest in R&D development. A private company is only able to fund doctoral study on the basis of an agreement with a university. Law 240/2010 foresees a two-step process for researcher careers: a three-year fixed-term contract (type A contract) – with the possibility of a two-year extension, awarded via an open selection process; the researcher can participate in calls for a type B contract (three-year fixed-term, not renewable), under a public competitive process. During this triennium, the researcher can participate in a national evaluation aimed at obtaining the abilitazione (accreditation – the highest academic qualification). If the researcher is successful, the university has to enrol him/her in a permanent position.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.6 in 2011 compared with 1.4 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The new Act on Doctoral Training (2013) includes measures aimed at increasing the quality of doctoral training, and encourages academia-industry collaboration, but it does not fully cover the Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training. Doctoral Programmes are assessed and evaluated at national level by the Ministry of Education, University and Research, on the basis of an evaluation and accreditation process against a set of criteria set up by ANVUR. The Italian Government has not adopted a Skills’ Agenda to improve researchers’ employment skills and competencies. However, higher education institutions are increasingly providing a variety of training and several skills portfolios on an autonomous basis.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 3.1 % in Italy compared with 4.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.2 % in Italy compared with 5.3 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

Although Italy has transposed the Scientific Visa Directive 71/2005, Universities and RPOs still face difficulties when recruiting third-country researchers. Some problems have been partly overcome thanks to a fruitful cooperation established in 2013 by MIUR, the universities, the research organisations, the Italian Rectors’ Conference and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The ministry introduced amendments to the procedures on immigration in December 2013, thus setting the conditions to facilitate the entry of third-country researchers to Italy. The Rita Levi Montalcini Programme is a national fellowship programme managed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research. It promotes the internationalisation of Italian universities by enabling early-stage researchers working abroad to carry out research projects at an Italian university of their choice. Its purpose is to recruit outstanding post-doctorate researchers working abroad and give them the opportunity to submit a proposal for a temporary position in conjunction with a proposal for a research grant. However, the Italian government has not put in place concrete measures to encourage young researchers to spend some time as a researcher in another country. A few universities have adopted, on a voluntary basis, an internal regulation which requires doctoral students to spend at least six months outside Italy before they sit their final PhD exam. In general, the outbound/inward mobility ratio is extremely high, to an extent that it has become a worry for the research authorities.

Law 240/2010 establishes a legal framework for regulating partnerships between academia and industry. A vast majority of universities and doctoral schools offer doctoral programmes between academia and industry on the basis of a memorandum of understanding. Thanks to their autonomy, Italian universities are free to establish bilateral relations with the business sector. Moreover, doctoral students are free to sign a high-level apprenticeship contract with an enterprise. Enterprises and other (private) employers can recruit a PhD student (under the age of 29) under a fixed-term contract subsidised by the local (regional) governments. Decree 297/1999 allocates financial contributions to SMEs where a researcher from a university or a public research centre is employed by the company for a maximum period of four years, renewable only once (eight years in total). However, this possibility has rarely been taken up.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Besides general legislation on gender equality (e.g. Law 215/2012 which introduced the ‘quote rosa’ for selection panels and boards of public companies), no legislative measures addressing gender equality in research have been adopted. However, an agreement on gender equality between MIUR and the Dipartimento per le Pari Opportunità was signed in January 2013. Within the framework of this agreement, a consultation panel analyses and coordinates activities related to gender equality in all scientific fields.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 43.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding careers for female researchers, the 2011 Government Act provides a specific budget of Euro 3.5 million for guaranteeing the salary of post-doctoral female researchers who interrupt their contract during maternity leave.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding the gender dimension on research content and programmes, the National Research Programme 2014-2020 includes a specific programme on gender streamlining with an annual budget of EUR 1 million. Moreover, the provision of medicine, based on scientific evidence and integrating the gender dimension was included in a bill in 2013. Several universities have also set up gender oriented academic courses. Four universities have set up doctorates and courses on gender studies (the Universities of Bologna, Roma3, Roma La Sapienza and Napoli Federico II), whilst the University of Bologna is involved in the international masters course GEMMA on Women's and Gender Studies.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Regarding gender balance in public research decision making, Law 240/2010 calls for gender balance on the ‘Board of trustees’ of research institutions; however the law does not specify targets. The need to ensure that peer review selection panels are gender balanced was recognised by MIUR in HIT2020.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Italy is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, Italy has recently adopted several legislative and policy measures to speed up the up-take and implementation of open access. Law 112/2013 introduces gold and green open access. The law makes it compulsory for research results resulting from projects funded by 50% or more of public funding to be in open access. The green road is based on an embargo period of between 18 and 24 months. Secondary legislation at the level of the MIUR and HEIs should be adopted in order to ensure the implementation of this regulation. Several measures have supported the voluntary adoption of open access by universities and research organisations. The CRUI (conference of deans) set up a Working Group on Open Access (CRUI Gruppo di lavoro Open Access) in 2006 aimed at disseminating open access in universities. The CRUI Working Group released guidelines on open access and promoted the inclusion of open access policies into university statutory regulations. It is reported that 38 universities (out of a total of 97) have introduced open access policies into their internal regulations. Italy participates in several EU initiatives such as OpenAIRE, MedOANet, PEER, NECOBELAC and Recode.

Related to open access to publications, HIT2020 supports the implementation of open access through Law 112/2013 with a view to achieving the target of 60 % of publications from public-funded programmes in open access.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 69.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, funding is provided to universities and research organisations for the dissemination of research data as part of the Cohesion Action Plan and the funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions, 'Big Data'. Italy is also a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 94 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is similar to within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding repositories, the Cohesion Action Plan launched in 2013 supports the setting up of infrastructures and open access systems for the dissemination of scientific publications and research data in the convergence regions. Moreover, MIUR launched a call in 2013 for strengthening research infrastructures in the convergence regions. This call earmarked EUR 10 million to develop systems based on open access for the long-term preservation of research results. At stakeholder level, the CRUI guidelines also provide recommendations on the preservation of information and on the promotion of open source software for the management of open access systems. The platform PLEIADI (Portal for Italian Electronic Scholarly Literature in Institutional Archives) provides access to the more than 505.000 documents deposited in Italian academic and research institutional repositories and open access journals. Regarding research data repositories, the two Italian supercomputing consortia CASPUR (Consorzia interuniversitario per le Applicazioni di Supercalcolo Per Università e Ricerca) and CILEA (Consorzio interuniversitario Lombardo per L’Elaborazione Automatica) implemented an Italian national platform in 2004 to provide central access to the digital content deposited in the Italian open archives.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Italy has adopted several legislative measures such as the Stability Law 2013, which is part of the development package, Pacchetto Sviluppo, D.L. 83/2012, D.L. 145/2013 and L. 9/2014. The National Technology Clusters programme, which was approved in October 2013, funds projects in line with Italy’s and Horizon 2020's priorities and involving partnerships between businesses, universities and public research organisations. According to the 2014 National Reform Programme, a tax credit scheme will be set up for businesses for the full-time employment of PhD students or university graduates with a view to enhancing the innovative potential of businesses. The promotion of knowledge transfer has also been supported through the start-up law and the reform of doctoral schools. Italy has not yet developed a knowledge transfer strategy.

Regarding strategic partnership and the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry, the 2014 National Reform Programme announces a reinforcement of existing initiatives such as the Contamination Labs, the programmes for innovative start-ups and university spinoffs.  Through the 2014 Stability Law, a fund endowed with EUR 5 million for 2014 and 2015 was established to support companies partnering with public research institutions and universities. Prior to 2014, Italy had adopted a series of measures, such as Decree 297/1999, Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education and the MIUR 2012 guidelines. Decree 297/1999 supports the implementation of bilateral agreements between academia and the private sector, by providing support to SMEs employing researchers from universities or public research organisations. Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education established a legal framework for regulating partnerships between academia and industry on the basis of a memorandum of understanding. Based on their autonomous status, Italian universities are free to establish bilateral relations with the business sector, such as placement programmes (e.g. internships) for researchers. MIUR also introduced in November 2012 the guidelines for managing partnerships between research performing organisations and HEIs to promote the mobility of research units. Moreover, the agreement between the Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) and Confindustria, which was signed in early 2013, aims at promoting researchers' mobility between the CNR and firms, as well as the development of technology clusters and excellent/top research activities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 67.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Italy who responded to the survey and support KT, OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

With regards to the implementation of Digital ERA, Italy has adopted several measures to support public e-infrastructures. Regarding repositories, the Cohesion Action Plan launched in 2013 supports the setting up of infrastructures and open access systems for the dissemination of scientific publications and research data in the convergence regions. The country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. GARR is the Italian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. GARR links universities and research institutions that provide networking and computing services. Italy has not set up a strategy for the implementation of Digital ERA.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and premium services. Policies for cloud computing and scientific software targeted for the research community are not yet available. However, the 2012 Digital Agenda (Agenda Digitale) initiative is expected to develop a common platform for software, content and communication in the education community.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Italy was not a member of an identity federation in 2011 or 2013. Italy is member of EDUgain through IDEM, i.e. EDUgain is a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations. The IDEM federation was set up in 2009 and is a service of the GARR network. The IDEM federation includes the majority of universities and research institutions in Italy and provides access to some digital research services, such as scientific data, scientific journals and cloud computing resources.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Italy, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 83 research performing organisations in Italy answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 22.6% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Italy shows that 46.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 39.7 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 14.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 84.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 14.5 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.6 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

In terms of funders, it should be noted that one major funder, which is responsible for a significant share of R&D funding, did not reply to the survey. This means that all indicators related to funders do not fully reflect the behaviour of Italian funders and should be interpreted with caution. In terms of research performers, it should be noted that several organisations which account for an important share of R&D personnel in the country did not reply to the survey.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National Research Programme (2014-2020) - draft || 2014 || X || X

Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X

National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X

National Operational Programme (PON) Research and Innovation & PON Enterprise and Competitiveness || || ||

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Ministry of Education, University and Research competitive calls (FIRB, PRIN, CLUSTER, SMART CITIES) || 2012 || X ||

Law on urgent measures for growth of the country (Law 7 August 2012 No 134) - Art. 63 peer review || 2012 || X ||

Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X

Atto di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per l’anno 2014 || 2014 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to promote quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010 and enacting Legislative decree 19/2012) || 2010 || ||

Legislative decree 31 December 2009, no. 213, Reorganisation of public research organisations || 2010 || ||

Quality Evaluation for Research (ANVUR) || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Joint programmes and bilateral agreements || || ||

National Research Programme (2014-2020) - draft || 2014 || X || X

‘Support to joint programming’ Programme || 2014 || X || X

Atto di indirizzo concernente l’individuazione delle priorità politiche del MIUR per l’anno 2014 || 2014 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Operational procedures for evaluation and financing of projects selected in international programmes and initiatives Prot. 556 28/03/2013 || 2013 || X || X

Law on urgent measures for growth of the country (Law 7 August 2012 n. 134) || 2012 || X ||

Law on urgent measures for simplification and growth (Law 4 April 2012 n. 35) || 2012 || X ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X

Italian roadmap of Research Infrastructures of Pan European interest || 2010 || ||

Horizon  2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation || 2013 || X || X

Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X

Programme ‘Research Infrastructures’ || 2014 || X || X

Attractive careers

Government Decree D.lgs 2013/2009 || 2009 || ||

Law 1/2009 || 2009 || ||

Regulation on modalities of acknowledgment of doctoral schools and criteria for the establishment of courses by acknowledged schools D.M. 8 February 2013 n.94 || 2013 || X || X

Euraxess Italy website || 2004 || ||

Regional Programmes – envelope dedicated to human resources || || ||

Programme' Rita Levi Montalcini' || || ||

Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivate quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) || || ||

Law on the organisation of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivise quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) || 2010 || ||

Law on urgent measures for simplification and growth (Law 4 April 2012 n. 35) - Doctoral courses Gran Sasso Science Institute || 2012 || X ||

Law on the organization of the university, on the academic personnel and on recruitment.  Government delegation to incentivise quality and efficiency of the university system (Law 240/2010) || 2010 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Partnership MIUR and Labour Ministry- Department equal opportunities || 2013 || X || X

National Research Programme 2014-2020 - specific programme on gender streamlining || 2014 || X || X

Law 240/2010 || 2010 || ||

2011 Government Act || 2011 || ||

Horizon 2020 Italy HIT2020 Research & Innovation Law 215/2012 || 2013 || X || X

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Law 112/2013 || 2013 || X || X

Horizon Italia 2020 (HIT2020) || 2013 || X || X

MIUR 10 million Euros call to develop systems based on open access in the convergence regions || 2013 || X || X

CRUI  WG Open Access || 2006 || ||

Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Decree Law 69/2013 on urgent measures to relaunch the economy || 2013 || X || X

Agreement between Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) e Confindustria || 2013 || X || X

Stability Law 2013 part of the Development package D.L. 83/2012 || 2013 || X || X

Decree 297/1999 || 1999 || ||

Law 240/2010 on the General Reform of University Education || 2010 || ||

D.L. 145/2013 || 2013 || X || X

L. 9/2014 || 2014 || X || X

Programme 'One thousand and more innovative PhDs' || 2014 || X || X

Funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions || 2013 || X || X

Project 'Messengers' || || ||

Measures to support public-private cooperation as part of the Stability Law 2013 || 2013 || X || X

Ministerial decree for the exchange of professors and researchers between universities and public research organisations || || ||

National Research Programme 2014-2020  - draft || 2014 || X || X

Stability Law || 2014 || X || X

National Technology Clusters || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Funding programme for start-ups in the convergence regions, 'Big Data' || 2013 || X || X

Measures to strengthen research infrastructures in the convergence regions - Cohesion Action Plan || 2013 || X || X

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Member of eduGAIN || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

In May 2013, the Lithuanian Prime Minister set up the national Research, Development and Innovation Strategic Council. This new structure brings together government, various ministries, academic and research institutions, the business sector, academia and independent experts. It is an advisory body aiming at coordinating science, technology and innovation development.

The other two principal governing bodies shaping research and innovation policy in Lithuania are the Ministry of Education and Science (ŠMM), responsible for higher education and science policy, and the Ministry of Economy (ŪM), which is responsible for innovation policy. The implementation of research and innovation policy is then mainly performed by a few number of funding agencies: the Central Project Management Agency (CPVA), the Agency for Science, the Agency for Science Innovation and Technology (MITA), the Lithuanian Business Support Agency (LVPA) and the European Social Fund Agency (ESFA). In addition, the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT) both advises the Parliament (Seimas) and acts as a funding structure.

The country has recently adopted some strategic documents that have relevance for research and innovation. In 2012, the National Progress Programme for Lithuania for the period 2014-2020, the Concept of the Establishment and Development of Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centres (Valleys) and the State Studies and R&D Programme for 2013-2020 were published. In 2013, the process of preparation for the 2014-2020 programming period accelerated, with the focus on smart specialisation. Broad research and development (R&D) and innovation priority areas were approved on October 2013 by a governmental resolution 'Concerning approval of the priority areas of research and development and innovation' (smart specialisation). The programme on the implementation of these priority areas was finally approved on April 2014 by the Government of the Republic of Lithuania.

In December 2013, the Lithuanian Government also approved the Lithuanian Innovation Development Programme 2014-2020 that replaced the previous Lithuanian Innovation Strategy 2010-2020. The LMT is also preparing the competitive R&D funding strategy, which is expected to be finalised in 2014. However, the EU Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) will remain the key funding source for research and innovation (R&I) policy.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Lithuania represented EUR 40 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1 % of total government expenditure and 0.36 % of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in Lithuania was higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP regressed more in Lithuania than in the EU-28.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Lithuania has witnessed an increasing share of government budgetary funding for research allocated to competitive peer-review-based procedures. The proportion increased from 12.1 % in 2006 to approximately 50 % in 2012. The major policy shift occurred in 2009, when the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT) acquired the functions of a funding agency. All executive agencies usually grant funding to projects through competitive calls for proposals based on administrative, quality/benefits and financial assessments of projects. The evaluation follows a process laid down in proposal guidelines, which are publicly available and prepared by each agency separately. These guidelines must include information on evaluation procedures, the peer-review process, the proposed evaluation supervision, decision-making on funding and others. There were no policy changes in this area in 2012-2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 47.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

International peer-review standards are applied in the evaluation on the research proposals and institutions. The implementation of a peer review is detailed and is described in the application guides and in the information packages to the applicants and the strategy documents. All the core principles for a peer review are applied systematically. However, the LMT attempts, where possible, to use international peer reviewers on a systemic basis, while other funding agencies mostly use local peer reviewers and projects evaluators.

The peer-review process is organised and managed the LMT and based on a methodology approved in 2010. It is based on research excellence criteria, which are set in guidelines for evaluating agency projects. The procedures are clear and transparent with some degree of flexibility, for instance for small calls. Evaluation criteria are systematically applied. Responsibilities are divided according to competences: experts evaluate the quality of projects, while managing authorities take the final decisions on funding. There is no publicly available data on the extent to which the peer review involves international scholars. In principle, the participation of international peer reviewers is not limited. However, in practice, the majority of grant proposals are submitted in Lithuanian (with a short summary in English), which could act as a linguistic barrier to the participation of international peer reviewers. There were no policy changes in this area in 2012-2013.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Lithuania has witnessed an increasing share of the public budget for research allocated on a competitive basis. The Government Decision (adopted in 2009 and subsequently amended in 2010 and 2012) on the method for the allocation of budgetary appropriations for R&D to public higher education and research institutions stipulated that a higher share of basic funding should be linked to research performance. The Decision established that 40 % in 2010 and 50 % in 2011 and subsequent years of basic funding would be allocated to public higher education institutions (HEIs) and research institutions on the basis of their assessed results from R&D activities. The remaining 50 % from 2011 is allocated on the basis of 'normative number of staff", which is approved for each institution by the decree from the Minister of Education and Science. In total, in 2013, the competitive funding constituted 33 % of total budgetary appropriation for research activities (EUR 57 million, sourced only from the national budget, excluding the EU Structural Funds), which is similar to 2012, when EUR 20 million, or 34 % of total funding was allocated to competitive R&D funding.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 25.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and supports an institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Overall, since 2010, Lithuania has stepped up efforts to implement joint research agendas through joint programming initiatives, international programmes and bilateral programmes. Nevertheless, financial commitments to joint research agendas are rather limited and national research programmes are only implicitly aligned with research priorities pursued at the ERA level.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania dedicated to transnational cooperation is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of the Member States, the Associated Countries and the third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Lithuania's total participation was 0.32 % and the country received 0.13 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 18.7 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) and 3.7 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2012 (the EU average was 2.6 % of GERD for the programming period until 21 February 2014).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in two of the ten ongoing initiatives: Cultural heritage and global change and Healthy and productive seas and oceans.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country has been involved in two programmes (Eurostars and Bonus). In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in one of the four existing initiatives (Eurostars2).

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination of national and regional research programmes. The country participates in six ERA-NETs, which help coordinate the participating countries’ activities. The country also participates in two ERA-NET plus actions, which have high European added value and additional EU financial support to facilitate the joint calls for proposals between national and/or regional programmes.

Four bilateral cooperation programmes (with Belarus, France, Ukraine and Belgium - Wallonia) are running, while one trilateral cooperation programme (with Latvia and Taiwan) ran for nine years under the LMT. In 2012, the LMT granted financing to 51 research projects implemented under the cooperation programmes that totalled EUR 0.3 million. The objectives of these programmes are not explicitly aligned with broader grand challenges and the funded projects covered a wide range of research areas. The Lithuanian-Swiss 'Research and Development' programme is dedicated to implementing joint research or institutional partnership projects in the field of Environmental Science and Technology, Health/Life Sciences, and Natural Sciences (EURO 7.3 million for 12 projects between 2011 and 2016). The Cooperation programme with Slovakia is under development to start in 2014 or 2015.

In addition, the Lithuanian Ministry of Economy actively seeks participation in the international innovation programmes which support international innovation networks, especially in the Baltic Sea Region. For instance, it has been acting as an administrating institution of the Green Industry Innovation Programme since 2012, conducted in cooperation with Norway.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. Lithuania has formal bilateral research cooperation agreements with China, Belarus, Ukraine Moldova and Kazakhstan. An agreement with Switzerland in the framework of their support for ‘new’ EU Member States provides funding for scholarships and joint projects. An agreement with the United States of America (USA) is quite active and successful: Lithuanian researchers can receive funding for collaborations with American partners. The USA is considering expanding this to include specific calls for funding for the American partners participating in this cooperation. For more than ten years, Lithuania has been involved in a trilateral cooperation with Latvia and Taiwan, which involves calls for joint research. A cooperation agreement is in the process of being signed with India. According to a bilateral governmental agreement signed in 2012, there is also a joint Lithuanian-Israeli initiative for funding research and innovation projects that are initiated by business subjects. The calls are implemented according to the Eureka programme rules and are orientated to both countries' applicants.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Lithuania dedicated to international cooperation with Third Countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of the organisations' R&D budget originating from third countries is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The funding agencies do not implement 'Money follows cooperation', which is a scheme that allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither of the funding agencies implements 'Money follows researchers', which is a scheme that enables researchers to move to a research institution in a different country and transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution, thus continuing research activities according to the original terms and objectives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and supports the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

Among funders who answered the survey, no project-based research funding is allocated on the basis of peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Lithuania participates in the following large international research infrastructures: CERN, ITER, ESA and EFDA.

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of six of them (12 %). The country coordinates none of them.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research Infrastructures (RIs), Lithuania is committed to fund one of them: European Social Survey (ESS). The preparation for financial commitments in CLARIN and CESSDA is also under way.

With regard to participation in European Research Infrastructure Consortia (ERICs), Lithuania is involved in one of the nine consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries: ESS ERIC.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of RIs, Lithuania adopted a national roadmap in 2011; 15 mature or promising projects were identified. The roadmap also presented the selected list of the European RIs that are considered to be attractive for some national RIs. However, no financial commitments for construction and operation of the global, national or regional RIs have been made in Lithuania so far. Currently, the funds are being allocated to the five 'Integrated science, studies and business valleys', with most of the money being invested into macro-regional research infrastructures. Furthermore, the national roadmap is under review (2014) and is expected to include six additional projects. The operational programmes that will define the investment priorities and respective budgets for 2014-2020 will be finalised in 2014. There are plans to use the 2014-2020 structural and investment funding for a wider integration into the European RIs, especially through the ESFRI roadmap.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The Guidelines approved by the Minister of Education and Science in 2012 and those adopted by the LMT, stipulate the procedures regulating the Lithuanian research institutions’ involvement in international RIs. Once completed, the five 'Integrated science, studies and business Valleys' should be operating as open access centres. This implies that, in principle, the access to research infrastructure should be granted to national and non-national academic and business establishments. Lithuania is not coordinating any research infrastructures that have been funded by the European Commission through the Seventh Framework Programme for Research.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Lithuania in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Lithuania _Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 8.390 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Lithuania in 2011. This represents 5.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and the EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 1.3 in Lithuania compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

The Law on Higher Education and Research (adopted in 2009) establishes the necessary conditions for an open, transparent, merit-based recruitment of researchers. Public HEIs and research institutes are legally obliged to: publish information on vacancies, establish a selection panel, publish selection criteria, provide an adequate time period for publishing the vacancy (three months), offer the right of appeal, etc. Job vacancies are published on dedicated websites (Research Council of Lithuania) and in newspapers, as well as on the EURAXESS jobs portal.

In 2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers is not actively promoted as a government programme. However, both the Rectors’ Conference and the Conference of Directors of Research Institutes have signed the Charter & Code.

The Researchers’ Career Programme aims to raise young people’s interest in pursuing a researchers’ career by offering attractive working conditions and clear career prospects. The programme supports scientists and researchers in their scientific activities and, moreover, it promotes the mobility of top-performing international researchers.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per 1 000 of population aged between 25 and 34 was 0.9 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on procedures for establishing the right to offer PhD studies stipulates that institutions willing to register new PhD programmes have to comply with considerably more stringent requirements in terms of excellence of research, relevance of proposed research programmes, human and physical resources etc. As a result an increasing number of Lithuanian institutions establish joint PhD programmes, with the view of pooling intellectual resources and research infrastructures. Coordination between universities and research institutes increases the quality of doctoral training, and fosters openness and transparency in the research system. The Research Council of Lithuania carries out quality and efficiency assessments of the doctoral training at least once every three years.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates holding citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 0.2 % in Lithuania, compared with 4.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 0.0 % in Lithuania compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

In principle researchers from EU and non-EU countries can apply for grants in Lithuania. However, the number of participating foreign researchers remains limited. Applications for funding schemes need to be submitted in Lithuanian, posing a language and administrative barrier for third-country nationals applying for funding schemes. There are several programmes (e.g. Global Grant) which aim at attracting and retaining EU and third-country national researchers, where the project proposals have to be submitted in both English and Lithuanian.

In order to encourage companies to employ (more) scientists, the Ministry of Higher Education and Science in 2010 allocated EUR 17.4 million in support of ‘State aid for highly qualified persons’ employment in enterprises for the period 2010-2013’. Funds were allocated for no more than three years to one company and per employed person. The financial support covered salaries, participants’ travel expenses and participation in events. However, the interest from enterprises was insufficient as of the end of 2011. The Ministry of Education and Science made EUR 939 348 available for projects implemented in 2012. This activity was managed by the European Social Fund Agency.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Gender equality in public research in Lithuania was formally endorsed by the Lithuanian Strategy Ensuring Equal Opportunities for men and women in sciences, and approved by the Lithuanian Minister of Science and Education in 2008 and valid until the end of 2013. It provided legal foundations for the introduction of 'Gender equity and gender mainstreaming' as a horizontal principle in other strategies and programmes (for example, the Researchers Career Programme). The main purpose of the strategy was to increase the number of female researchers in physics and technology, and in high-level positions. In addition, the strategy called for a review and possible amendments to the law with the aim of introducing additional finance tools for female scientists.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 44.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted the Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Female researchers in Lithuania enjoy a number of rights enabling them to interrupt or to extend their contract in the framework of maternity leave. Researchers employed under an employment contract have the right to go on maternity leave for up to three years (social benefits are not paid during the third year of leave, but the workplace is secured). If the researcher is unemployed, he/she is eligible for the social allowances and benefits that are available to officially unemployed persons.

In 2012, in response to a Letter from the Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson in Lithuania, the LMT provided explanations concerning the requirements necessary for candidates to attain positions of professors and researchers, and the establishment of qualification requirements for research staff members. In the LMT's opinion, the currently effective general legal acts do not presuppose any infringement of the equal opportunities requirement. Research and study institutions do not normally include a period of child care leave into a researcher's term of office. This provision should be foreseen in employment contracts and the internal regulations of institutions. The LMT is considering the possibility of reviewing the minimum qualification requirements by explicitly excluding the period of child care leave when evaluating the results attained by researchers in a five-year period. In addition, as LMT grants are associated with specific short-duration programmes, the period of child care is not included in the funding. In case of three-party agreements (researcher - managing scientific institution - LMT), if a researcher/project manager takes maternity leave, she either steps down for good or a specific time period. In the case of the Global grants programme (two-party agreement), if a researcher takes maternity leave, a project is cancelled. However, under the 2011-2013 national project 'Promotion of gender equality in sciences', the LMT provided grants to researchers after maternity (paternity) leave. Currently, the LMT is not planning a similar project for the 2014-2020 period.

As a general rule, funding agencies do not include gender criteria in assessing proposals for funding. When assigning grants, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences (LMT) does not give any priority regarding a researchers’ gender. In general, the LMT has not received any complaints about violating gender equality in funding research activities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotional policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Gender dimension does not seem to be an issue in research programmes. Nevertheless, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences and its partners, including the LMT, implemented the national project 'Promotion of gender equality in sciences' (LYMOS, budget EUR 0.6 million) between 2011 and 2013. It issued several analytical reports and provided recommendations for updating the Strategy on Equal Opportunities.

For the time being, there is no systemic approach or legal regulations to promote gender equality on academic and research committees, boards and governing bodies, etc. in Lithuania.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 58.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey did not indicate any support to the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

For the time being, there is no systemic approach or legal regulations to promote gender equality on academic and research committees, boards and governing bodies, etc. in Lithuania.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 42.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 137.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 34.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Lithuania is similar to the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the Law on Higher Education and Research stipulates that all results obtained from research activities carried out in state higher educational and research institutions or in education research institutions using state budget funds must be publicly announced, and that the results of research conducted in non-state higher education and research institutions using funds from the state budget shall be publicly announced (on the Internet or any other way).

However, the implementation of open access to scientific information remains problematic. Firstly, institutions and researchers do not have sufficient incentive to ensure open access to research results. Secondly, public financial support for the development of open access databases has been fragmented over a number of relatively uncoordinated projects. Currently, there are at least four public databases: database on students’ theses and dissertations, the academic electronic database, the 'Lituanistika' database on Lithuanian research in humanities and social sciences, the social science data service LiDA, containing social survey data, historical statistics and data on the Lithuanian political system. None of them has reached critical mass to become a dominant source of information on research production in the Lithuanian research system; they only include a fraction of the research outputs (publications and data) and do not always provide access to full-text sources contained elsewhere.

At the agency level, the LMT has been supporting the publication of research results supports since 2012. The support is targeted at the Lithuanian researchers to enable them to publish their scientific articles in high-level scientific journals, as well as independent scientific books. The Agency for Science, Innovation and Technology (MITA) has been managing the Science and Research Open Access (MITAP) project (EUR 0.7 million for 2012-2014), which addresses three main challenges: the public access to the R&D activities results; the centralised promotion of open access centres’ activity; the technology transfer organisation and implementation through open access centres. In 2013, the Ministry of Education and Science nevertheless appointed the LMT to be responsible for open access development in Lithuania.

Related to open access to publications, the LMT makes all project summaries and reports (green access initiative) publicly available. Since 2009, the LMT has been developing the international scientific database 'Lituanistika' by accumulating and disseminating verified information on the most current Lithuanian studies. No other initiatives are planned for the near future.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 65 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support OA to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the LMT has applied a rule ensuring that since a research project is finalised in a three-year time period, data on empirical projects should be provided to a managing research institution and scientific society.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 80.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support OA to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

As regards repositories, in 2011, EUR 4.3 million was allocated to Vilnius University to implement the project 'National open access archive of research information (MIDAS)'. It seeks to provide infrastructure for the preservation of and open access to research data. It is planned to integrate it with other databases. In order to address this issue, the Programme for the Development of Lithuanian Research and Studies Informational Infrastructure for 2013-2016 (total budget EUR 18 million) was approved. Its target is that 40 % of publications and at least 10 % of the collected data should be publicly available, free of charge, by 2016.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, on the basis of the Law on Higher Education and Research adopted on 30 May 2009, Lithuania has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. It fosters open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. It is implemented through the updated Concept of the Establishment and Development of Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centres (Valleys) (adopted in October 2012 and updated in April 2014). The  Concept provides the basis for the continuation of investments into five science ‘valleys’ and establishes the policy mix for fostering research collaboration and the bridges between academia and industry.

The strategic partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Lithuania. However, despite a large number of strategic documents and different measures, there is a lack of consensus on the overall logic of intervention for fostering open innovation and knowledge transfer. Instead, different strategies (and their institutional 'owners') focus on separate elements, which imply a risk of fragmentation. Evidence on the success of implemented measures is lacking and the results of available evaluation reports point to the remaining systemic barriers in the field of open innovation and knowledge transfer.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 7.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 12.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 67.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Lithuania who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERAcompliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

As regards the implementation of the Digital ERA, Lithuania has not set up any strategy. However, as a general rule, publicly funded e-infrastructures are accessible to researchers from both public and private sectors without major restrictions. In addition, the 'Lithuanian virtual university programme 2007-2012' has been running since 2007. It provides Lithuanian higher education and research institutions with access to academic e-library and distance-learning platforms. A new programme for 2013-2016 was approved in 2012, under the name of the 'Lithuanian higher education and science institutions' informational infrastructure development programme' (LITMIS). LITNet is the Lithuanian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of research and education communities within the country.

With regards to digital services, the country provides federated services and premium services (consultancy, security audits, NREN service implementation support).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Lithuania is not a member of eduGAIN.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 48.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Lithuania, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 14 research performing organisations in Lithuania answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 44.4% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Lithuania shows that 53.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 46.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and n.a. % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 87.0 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 13.0 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and n.a. % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Promotion of High-Level International Scientific Research || 2012 || X ||

Decision of the Research Council of Lithuania on methods and procedures governing competitive funding of research. || 2011 || ||

Support for Research Activities of Scientists and Other Researchers (Global Grant) || 2009 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Government decision on the method for allocation of budgetary appropriations for R&D and artistic activities in public  research and higher education institutions || 2012 || X ||

Law on higher education and research || 2012 || X ||

Strategies relevant for research and innovation || 2012 || X ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Lituathian contributions to the implementation of joint research agendas || 2010 || ||

Bilateral and trilateral programmes for research cooperation || 2011 || ||

EU strategy for Baltic Sea Region / BONUS || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Evaluations in the context of European (joint) programmes || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on participation in international research infrastructures || 2012 || X ||

Roadmap for Research Infrastructures of Lithuania || 2011 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Regulation on "Management of Open Access Centres" || 2011 || ||

Decision of the Research Council of Lithuania on procedures for initiation of participation in international RIS || 2012 || X ||

Attractive careers

Decree of the Minister of Education and Science on procedures for establishing the right to offer phd studies || 2011 || ||

Lithuanian national EURAXESS centres || || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Lithuanian Strategy Ensuring Equal Opportunities for male and female in sciences || 2008 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

LYMOS project || || ||

Promotion of gender equality in sciences || 2011 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

National open access archive of research information (MIDAS) || 2011 || ||

Law on Higher Education and Research || 2009 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Measure for promoting the commercialization process of certain innovative products, technologies or services as well as its entry into the market. || 2012 || X ||

Concept of the Establishment and Development of Integrated Science, Studies and Business Centers (Valleys) || 2012 || X ||

National Progress Programme for Lithuania for the period 2014-2020 and other strategic documents || 2012 || X ||

State Studies and R&D Programme for 2013-2020 || 2012 || X ||

Promotion of High-Level International Scientific Research || 2012 || X ||

Intellect LT - Joint science and business projects aimed at commercialization of research results || 2013 || X || X

“Science and Technology for Innovative Businesses” || 2012 || X ||

Direct support measures for public-private cooperation || 2007 || ||

Programme for Development of Lithuanian Research and Studies Informational Infrastructure 2013-2016 || 2012 || X ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Access to publicly funded e-infrastructures || || ||

Implementation of the project “Creation of Open Access Centres of Information Technologies”, || 2012 || X ||

Implementation of the Lithuanian Virtual University Programme for 2007–2012 || 2012 || X ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR) (research)and the Ministry of the Economy (MECO) (innovation).

The MESR provides block funding and is in charge of research performers such as the University of Luxembourg, the public research institutions Gabriel Lippmann, Henri Tudor, Santé and CEPS/INSTEAD. The MESR also oversees the National Research Fund (NRF). Founded in 1999, the NRF oversees funding for public sector research programmes and administers the national funding programme for doctorate and post-doctoral studies (Aid for Research Training,AFR).

The MECO supports private sector research under the law of 5 June 2009. Luxinnovation, the National Agency for Innovation and Research, bridges the public and private sectors, while a governmental Superior Committee for Research and Innovation (Comité Supérieur de la Recherche et de l’Innovation) advises the MESR and MECO in order to contribute to greater consistency and coherence in the research policy mix.

The country has adopted a national multiannual strategy for research and innovation. This is demonstrated by such measures as the performance contracts between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR) and the public research organisations (PROs), which currently run from 2014-2017 (the preceding ones covered 2008-2010 and 2011-2013) and the National Research Fund (NRF) programmes such as CORE, which is also funded from 2014-2017 (and previously from 2008-2010 and 2011-2013).

Two draft laws on research ("Fonds Nationale de la Recherche: Loi Modicative" and " Loi Centres de Recherches Public") have been sent to Parliament are foreseen to be ratified in 2014. New budgets and the terms of the new performance contracts 2014-2017, based, among others, on how well the objectives of the contracts for 2011-2013 were met, were finalised in May 2014. Luxembourg has a  Country Specific Recommendation: Pursue the diversification of the structure of the economy, including by fostering private investment in research and further developing cooperation between public research and firms.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Luxembourg represented EUR 538 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 544. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5 % of total government expenditures and 0.7 % of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Luxembourg has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Luxembourg even when it regressed at EU28 level.

As mentioned earlier, two draft laws are currently in the legislative process and foreseen to be ratified in 2014 aimed at further consolidating and harmonising the Luxembourg research system. In April 2012, a first draft of the NRF was submitted. Its principle modifications occur on four different levels, :

1. updating of NRF tasks,

2. re-determination of the framework of organisations eligible to receive NRF intervention,

3. improvement of governance

4. the introduction of collective subsidies for training research.

Subsequent to the first complementary opinion of the State Council, certain governmental amendments were introduced in October 2013. The second draft law for the organisation of research centres was submitted in January 2013. There were four modifications recommended to the 1987 law: Public Research Centre (CRP) status, CRP missions, administrative and governance bodies of CRP and CRP personnel. In addition to the principal elements stated above, the current draft law comprises two major complementary elements, the merger of CRP-Gabriel Lippmann and CRP-Henri Tudor and the incorporation of the Integrated BioBank of Luxembourg into the CRP–Santé.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The performance contracts 2014-2017 also include funding commitments and targets for external funding, in particular for competitive funding.

Evaluations of PROs by international experts are also mandated in performance contracts. The results of the evaluations of the public research centres are published on the MESR website and, for the university, on its website. It should be noted that the entire national research system was evaluated by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2006 and the NRF undertook a Foresight Study in 2006-2007.  The government ordered a new study by the OECD in 2013 on the national research and innovation system with the objective of analysing the level and degree of quality of the implementation of recommendations issued during the 2006 evaluation. The objective of this study is to draw up an independent and comparative report on the strengths and weaknesses of the national research and innovation system at present, and to formulate specific recommendations to improve and optimise the national research and innovation policy and the tools to be used in the area, based on good practices identified in other OECD nations. It was also to identify good practices in the Luxembourg context that could serve as a reference to other OECD countries.

The MESR considers its performance contracts with Luxembourg’s PROs as integral policy documents. Performance contracts mandate increasing amounts of competitive, project-based funding to be obtained by Luxembourg’s PROs as prerequisites for government funding. Regular evaluations of the public research centres are required; the university is also evaluated on a regular basis by the law of 12 August 2003. In addition, performance contracts include 'research performance' targets such as the number of publications, patents, spin-offs and doctoral students trained, as well as purely financial benchmarks. Evaluations of how well PROs have met the criteria established in their performance contracts are done annually and at the end of each period and form the basis of performance contract targets for the forthcoming period.

All programmes funded through the NRF operate with a system of calls. The ATTRACT, CORE, INTER and OPEN programmes have annual calls, while calls for the PEARL programme are open all year. The new National Centre of Excellence (NCER) also issues calls. Calls are published on the NRF website and are also broadcast via the eNewsletter of the Luxembourg Portal for Innovation and Research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are an inherent part of the proposal evaluation process of proposals for the NRF CORE programme. All of these factors form the basis of an effective base policy mix of Luxembourg’s national research system (NRS).

Funding programmes of the NRF require proposals be subject to review by independent, international experts and adhere to the core principles of international peer review. The ATTRACT programme is a typical example. Each proposal is initially evaluated by three independent, international expert reviewers. Based on these evaluations, up to five candidates are invited to present their proposal to a panel, which also includes one of the independent international experts. The final decision is made by the NRF’s Board of Administration and Scientific Council, members of the latter of which are also members of respected international organisations.

Private sector research funding essentially falls under the purview of the MECO under the law of 5 June 2009. Funding proposals under this scheme are not subject to international peer review and are confidential.

In terms of the evaluation of research actors receiving public sector funding, mandatory evaluations are required by performance contracts and the university under the law of 12 August 2003. The results of the evaluations will be published. The NRF requirement that proposals be submitted in English is not considered to be an impediment for either resident or foreign-based researchers. The private sector research funding under the law of 5 June 2009 is altogether less transparent.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is allocated based on institutional assessment.

Performance contracts provide the institutions with quite large autonomy in defining and implementing a four year research development strategy. They include funding commitments and targets for external funding as well as provisions for human resources development for researchers. Increasing amounts of competitive and project-based funding as well as mandatory regular evaluations of the public research centres (or their departments) by international peer review are mandated by performance contracts. The University of Luxembourg is also evaluated on a regular basis under the law of 12 August 2003. The results of evaluations of the public research centres are published on the MESR website and, for the university, on its website. All evaluations are conducted through a peer review by independent, international experts.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey do not allocate institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 10 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Luxembourg allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Luxembourg dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of Luxembourg in total participation is 0.2 % and the country received 0.1 % of total European Commission (EC) contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 74 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 1.3 % of the gross domestic expenditures (GERD) on R&D for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in one of the ten ongoing initiatives. This initiative is Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer).

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the existing four initiatives: EDCTP, AAL and Eurostars.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 15 ERA-NETs, of which five are currently still running. The country has also participated in three ERA-NET Plus actions, of which one is still running, in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with research organisations in EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, the NRF has nine bilateral agreements notably with the Belgian Science Policy Service (BELSPO), the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) the German Research Foundation (DFG), the National Centre for Scientific Research in France (CNRS), the French National Research Agency (ANR), the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) the National Centre for Research and Development of Poland (NCBIR), the Research Councils of the United Kingdom (RCUK) and the Austrian Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (FWF).

Luxemburg also participates in:

EUROCORES Scheme of the European Science Foundation (ESF)

European Collaborative Research Projects ERCP (ESF)

Materials World Network (MWN) NSF MATERIALS

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. However, the NRF’s INTER programme funds Luxembourg researcher participation in international projects. The aim of the programme is to promote international scientific cooperation, to create synergies between research centres within and outside Luxembourg, to achieve a critical mass in certain fields, to take a better approach to the resolution of certain transnational issues, and to increase the visibility and competitiveness of research in Luxembourg. It should be noted that project funding is for Luxembourg researchers working in Luxembourg to go abroad or for researchers from elsewhere to come to Luxembourg

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the organisations did not receive funding from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Luxembourg is one of the few countries implementing the Lead Agency system, which allows a full mutual recognition of the evaluation process between research funding organisations.

As Luxembourg does not possess a critical mass of researchers, it actively encourages research collaboration between researchers in Luxembourg and abroad. Grants are fully open to non-residents in Luxembourg. The selection process is neither related to the country of residence of the researcher nor to the researcher’s nationality.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support the allocation of project-based funding on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

Research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Luxembourg participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA and EMBL.

Luxembourg participates in two infrastructures, DARIAH and SHARE, which were selected by the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). Although the process on national ESFI roadmap is not formalised, the country has launched a national consultation process. The government is currently analysing opportunities for strategic participation in other infrastructures on the ESFRI roadmap in conjunction with research institutions and users of research, especially in the bio-medical domain.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Luxembourg is not involved.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Not applicable

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Luxembourg in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Luxembourg_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 2 636 FTE researchers in Luxembourg in 2011. This represents 11.2 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 120.3 in Luxembourg compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 72 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The University of Luxembourg and the public research centres are in the process of developing a human resources policy, including recruitment measures, under the provisions of the ‘Charter & Code’. The EURAXESS portal is regularly used by the University of Luxembourg, public research institutions and by an increasing number of private institutions for job announcements. English is the preferred language for non-administrative posts. Finally, there are no legal, institutional or cultural barriers (at national/regional/local level) to the openness and transparency of the national recruitment system.

The proposal for a new Law on Public Research Institutions calls on the Boards of the Centres to define clear recruitment procedures in the internal regulations.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The University of Luxembourg, four public sector research institutions and the National Research Fund (FNR) have endorsed the ‘Charter & Code’ and are involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers. The AFR Grant Schemes are also in line with the principles advocated in the Charter & Code. Under the future new law on public research institutions, the implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ will become mandatory. By May 2014, two organisations had received the HR Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

All new positions at the University of Luxembourg are open to external researchers. Luxembourg institutions do not actively promote career development provisions with the exception of the AFR grant selection criteria at post-doctoral level which include career prospects. Neither the University of Luxembourg nor the public sector research centres provide tenure track possibilities. The only exception is the ATTRACT scheme of the FNR: in order to attract excellent researchers to Luxembourg, the FNR has made it mandatory for applicants to receive a guarantee from their institutions based on an objective performance review. This paves the way to them receiving an unlimited contract at the end of their grant with the prospect of advancing to the corresponding level of seniority, with the same rights and obligations as the other permanent researchers in the institution.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.8 in 2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The currently proposed reform of the FNR (Fonds National de la Recherche) law foresees the implementation of a new funding instrument to allocate collective AFR (Aides à la Formation-Recherche) PhD-grants to Luxembourg public research units, based on criteria such as scientific excellence, and the quality of doctoral training and supervision. The FNR is developing in parallel a quality framework for doctoral training, which defines a basic set of requirements for the management, quality and academic standards of the training of FNR-funded PhDs across all Luxembourg institutions. The implementation of this quality framework will be part of the assessment exercise for the new AFR collective grant scheme (foreseen in 2015).

The University of Luxembourg together with the public sector research centres have, when appropriate, set up doctoral schools for PhD candidates in order to improve researchers’ employment skills and competencies. The proposed new AFR collective grant scheme will support high-quality doctoral training programmes offering scientific and non-scientific skills. The FNR offers training in project management to starting AFR beneficiaries and career orientation training, 'From Learning to Earning' to AFR candidates in the end phase of their PhD or post-doctoral. Moreover, the University of Luxembourg has a set of training courses to promote researchers’ transferable skills, including communication, writing, intellectual property rights (IPR) and entrepreneurship, etc.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 67.9 % in Luxembourg compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.3 % in Luxembourg compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The FNR’s Inter Mobility Scheme supports the mobility of researchers based in Luxembourg to move abroad as well as the mobility of foreign researchers moving to Luxembourg (up to one year), thus establishing collaborative links between Luxembourg and foreign research institutions. Luxembourg has also implemented the Hosting Agreement (‘Scientific Visa’) scheme, which facilitates the inward migration of third-country researchers. This has helped attract non-EU researchers to both the public and private sectors.

The AFR scheme supports researchers in carrying out their PhD and/or post-doctoral training in collaboration with a private company in Luxembourg. The research project is developed jointly by the AFR candidate, the private company and the public partner, and it needs to be innovative and create 'new knowledge'. The AFR scheme provides for i) researchers to be trained in companies and to carry out their research training projects in collaboration with the company and ii) companies to contribute to the training of the researchers and benefit from their expertise. In 2013, 12 new AFR-public private partnerships (PPP) received funding, amounting to a total of 38 AFR-PPPs running at the end of 2013.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

For all its achievements in realising the aims of the other ERA priorities, when it comes to gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research, Luxembourg policies have moderate impact.

It is only recently that concrete links between institutional gender equality performance and research funding have been established.

There are no legal barriers to the recruitment or career progression of women and, in fact, all Luxembourg public research institutions have signed the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers that supports gender equality. In practice, however, the policy environment has not much impact. This is despite Luxembourg’s open market for researchers and active support of researcher mobility, described in the section covering ERA Priority 3.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Responding funders did not indicate any support to gender equality in research. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Researchers working at the University of Luxembourg and in public research centres are considered as ‘private employees’, similar to researchers in the private sector. Social benefits, such as maternity leave and the right to return to a position following maternity leave, for researchers at all levels, including PhDs and post doctoral studies are those set in the legal framework of the general labour market. On a national level, while there are laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender, there are no policies that explicitly promote more equal gender representation for researchers. An exception is the NRF, which encourages Luxembourg PROs to support female candidates for ATTRACT and PEARL grants. Despite this, of the eight ATTRACT fellows, only two are women and of the four PEARL grant recipients, there are none.  The Aides à la Formation-Recherche (AFR) PhD and post-doctoral grant programme is also supportive of female candidates, and has a good track record in this area, although selection is made on the basis of the quality of the research proposed. Still, the proportion of women in the AFR programme, which is more than 40%, exceeds those in academia or on boards.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

There seems to be no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey did not indicate support for the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

As regards gender balance in decision-making in Luxembourg new draft laws on the NRF and CRP state that the proportion of members of Administration Boards and Scientific Councils is not to fall under 40 % for either gender.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 25.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Luxembourg is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access (OA), highlighting the need for establishing common guidelines, the Government programme invites all relevant stakeholders to allow open access to their scientific publications.

Formal initiatives addressing OA are a recent development in Luxembourg, which are being led by the National Library and the University of Luxembourg. It should be noted that the library has a history of being involved in the Creative Commons initiative as well as being active in 'Digital Humanities'. The NRF also signed Science Europe’s Position Statement on Principles for the Transition to Open Access to Research Publications  in April 2013.

Related to open access to publications, the University of Luxembourg has chosen to support the Open Access 'Green Road' which views the author as being at the heart of the publishing process, including the distribution and promotion of his or her work. In cooperation with the University of Liege, the university is implementing the ORBil system to provide the means by which authors can publish their research and make it publically available. In addition to tools such as ORBi, a responsive help-desk and targeted training that provide support for the entire publishing process are key elements in the success of the university’s OA policy.

In addition to its own digital repository, the university library is in the process of becoming Luxembourg’s National Open Access Desk (NOAD) for the European Commission’s Opener project. OpenAIRE8 provides a platform by which authors can meet the OA publishing requirements of the European Commission’s FP7 and, in the future, Horizon 2020 (H2020). The role of the NOAD is to provide a nationally accessible help-desk which will advise all authors financed by FP7 and H2020, be they at the university or not.

Although all PROs, including the university, offer listings of their publications, there is no use of metadata, either to denote funding source or even provide keywords. PRO CEPS/Instead publishes the papers that are not issued “commercially” on its site. The NRF provides the final reports of the projects it funds.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, there seems to be limited support.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, an OA national repository strategy that goes beyond the university is not yet in place, although the NRF is a signatory to Science Europe’s Principles for a transition to  open access.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Luxembourg has developed a knowledge transfer strategy. It fosters an open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. The funding organisation has a specific funding line dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer. All of the performance contracts between the MESR and Luxembourg’s PROs and university foresee PPP's as a key component. The Cité des Sciences being built in Esch-Belval will provide facilities for PPP's and a business incubator as well as housing the university and other PROs. Performance contracts also include targets for filing patents and spin-offs.

Funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programme. A new initative is a linkage between the NRF and Luxinnovation. To support the valorisation of the research results of NRF-funded projects, each funded CORE project will be assessed by the NRF together with Luxinnovation in terms of its potential economic impact. If such a potential is identified for a given project, the researchers are invited to collaborate with Luxinnovation in order to explore its possible valorisation.

Strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in Luxemburg.

For the private sector, the law of 5 June 2009 both foresees the secondment of researchers to SMEs to carry out research and provides project support.

In 2013, the Technoport business incubator moved into purpose-built facilities in the City of Sciences. It was awarded the European 'EC-BIC' quality label by the European Commission in recognition of its services and infrastructure quality.

Finally, Luxinnovation organises 'Business Meets Research' days as well as running a cluster programme. Cluster membership represents all the knowledge triangle parties. Current clusters include eco innovation, healthcare and biotechnologies, information and communication technologies, material technologies and space technologies. In 2013, an Automotive Components cluster was formed. There are also groups for logistics and maritime activities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 94.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 94.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Luxembourg who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, there seems to be no research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Luxembourg is currently setting up a strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible.

An example of Luxembourg’s e-infrastructure that relates to research is the CVCE (Centre Virtuel de la Connaissance sur l'Europe), which is a research and documentation centre for European studies. The Centre creates digital publications that are particularly geared towards researchers and lecturers, while remaining open to a wider public.  Like the National Library, it is also a major actor in 'Digital Humanities.'

RESTENA is the very high-speed network for the education and research community of Luxembourg. The connection provides access to the pan-European research network GÉANT2, as well as to the Internet.

Concerning digital services, the country provides both federated and premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Luxembourg, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Luxembourg was a member of an identity federation in 2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

No research-performing organisations indicated whether they provide federated electronic identities for their researchers.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 4 research performing organisations in Luxembourg answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents % of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Luxembourg shows that 50.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 50.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and n.a. % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 94.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 5.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and n.a. % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

The results for the RPOs should be interpreted with caution since two major RPOs did not reply to the survey, whilst two respondent RPOs tend to have a rather marginal role in the R&D landscape.

For the indicator ‘ Share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plan, the figure should be ‘0%’ amongst the ERA compliant cluster, as all organisations in this cluster reported not having adopted Gender Equality Plans.

For the indicators 'Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations' and  ‘Share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.)’, the figures are most likely underestimated. This is due to the fact that some RPOs did not answer this question.

More in general in a small country like Luxembourg some ERA actions are organised in a more informal way.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Law on NRF || 2014 || X || X

Law on research centres || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Revision of the Law of 9 March 1987 on the organisation of the public research centres and on the establishment of the public research centres LIST, Santé and CEPS (to be adopted). || || ||

Strategy Luxembourg 2020 || 2011 || ||

NCER Programme || 2014 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

PEARL Programme || 2008 || ||

Performance contracts 2014-2017 between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research and Public Research Organisations Santé, Gabriel Lippmann, Henri Tudor, CEPS, FNR and Luxinnovation Agency. Third contract 2014-2017 between the Ministry of Higher Education and Research || 2014 || X || X

Implementation of the pilot-Programme  OPEN || 2013 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Bi-lateral agreements (NRF) || 2012 || X ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

EURAXESS Portal || || ||

Attractive careers

AFR Programme of PhDs and post-docs || 2008 || ||

Human resources policies for researchers of the Ministry of Higher Education and Research || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

NRF || || ||

draft Law on gender in NRF and CRP || 2014 || X || X

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Open Access intitiative at the University of Luxembourg || 2013 || X || X

Creation of the National Open Acess Desk (NOAD) || 2013 || X || X

NRF signatory to Science Europe Open Access principles || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Performance Contracts || 2014 || X || X

« Luxembourg cluster initiative » || 2012 || X ||

Creation of the new incubator Technoport S.A. || 2012 || X ||

Law of 5 June 2009 relating to the promotion of research, development and innovation || 2009 || ||

Linkage between NRF and Luxinnovation || 2012 || X ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

National Library digital resources access || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are under the common responsibility of the Ministry of Education and Science (research and development) and the Ministry of Economics (innovation), which share the governance of the national research and innovation system. At the political level, a new national authority, namely the Prime Minister’s Cross-sector Coordination Centre, started coordinating and monitoring national development planning in 2012. The Latvian Council of Science henceforth acts as a funding agency for the Ministry of Education and Science, assessing applications for research funding and allocating money for fundamental and applied research projects. Its policymaking function has gradually been taken over by the Ministry, leaving the Council primarily operating as a research funding council, mostly orientated to the academic research community. The role of Latvia’s Academy of Sciences as a science policy adviser has been gradually reduced during the past few years.

A major reorganisation of the Ministry of Education and Science took place in 2012. The objective was to achieve a smaller, efficient, motivated and result-orientated state administration in the domains under its political responsibility (education, science, youth, sports and language). Nevertheless, this may have caused some delays in preparing the 2014-2020 planning period, as well as in implementing several important plans, including the ERA dimension.

The country has adopted several documents relating to national strategy for research and innovation. The most relevant document is the National Development Plan for 2014-2020 (adopted on 20 December 2012), which foresees to investing on average 1.5 % of GDP in research and development (R&D) by 2020. It integrates expenditures from national sources and financing from abroad. The other is the National Reform Programme of Latvia (NRP) for the Implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy. The latter demonstrates a certain attempt to reconsider the priorities of the research, development and innovation (RDI) strategy in the light of the economic situation. In 2013, a task force was mobilised to elaborate the 'Guidelines for Development of Science Technologies and Innovation [ST&I] for 2014-2020' and efforts were made in order to design the Regional Smart Specialisation Strategy.' Guidelines for the Development of Science, Technologies and Innovation for 2014-2020', approved by the government in December 2013, include a component of the smart specialisation strategy that has identified a few specialisation fields: knowledge-based bio-economics, bio-medicine, medical technologies, bio-pharmacy and biotechnologies, advanced materials, technologies and engineering, smart energy and information and communication technologies (ICT).

The National Reform Programme of Latvia sets the following priorities with regard to the R&D domain: advancement of the potential of scientific activity; development of a long-term cooperation platform for enterprises and scientists; and support for developing innovative enterprises. The named priorities have mainly been selected on the basis of the low share of R&D in gross domestic product (GDP), which is explained by the small amount of state budget funding, and an insufficient contribution of the private sector to research.

It should also be noted that the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation (CSR) for Latvia invites to 'Take steps for a more integrated and comprehensive research system also by concentrating financing towards internationally competitive research institutions'.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Latvia represented EUR 16 per inhabitant in 2012, less than 10 % of the EU-28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.4 % of total government expenditure and 0.2 % of GDP (Eurostat).

The share of European Structural Funds in RTD funding has grown over time and in 2013, it has already amounted to twice as much as the national budget.

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in Latvia has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Latvia than in the EU-28.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

In 2012-2013, the state budget funding was split in roughly equal shares between institutional funding (50.5 %) and competitive project-based funding, but when financing from abroad is discounted, the research community in Latvia is receiving only 10 % of national funding in the form of institutional funding directly without competition, while 90 % is awarded on a competitive basis. The allocation principles of the state budget resources were supposed to be changed, thus promoting a concentration of excellence and human resources, fostering cooperation with industry and strengthening national identity. But no change of that kind seems to have happened in 2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 81.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

International peer review standards are applied in the evaluation of the research proposals and institutions by the Latvian Council of Science (starting from 2011) and partly by a few other bodies responsible for allocating research funds. New rules for the evaluation of proposals are currently under development under the responsibility of the Latvian Council of Science.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

In the past, institutional funding has not been allocated based on transparent institutional assessment. This is the reason why the 2013 country specific recommendation advised to 'take further steps to modernise research institutions based on the ongoing independent assessment'. This assessment is currently taking place, and its outcome should be known during the summer of 2014. In parallel, a research institution development strategy should be developed until 1 July of 2014.

The outcome of the evaluation of scientific institutions will influence the allocation of institutional funding, but this will only be an indirect one. Latvian authorities are indeed planning to establish the link between the allocation of institutional funding, including the funding of the State National Research Centres, and the granting of the EU Structural Funds.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It strongly supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Latvia allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Latvia dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

So far, there has not been any strategy aiming at either designing national joint or open research programmes in general or concerning the grand challenges, in particular outside the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) and Horizon 2020 in Latvia. FP7 fosters the cooperation between the Member States’ institutions, the Associated Countries and the third countries. In FP7, Latvia’s share of contribution in total participation is 0.3 % and the country received 0.1 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP funding represents EUR 20 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 6.8 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, Latvia is associated as an observer to two of the ten ongoing initiatives: Water Challenges for a Changing world, and A healthy diet for a healthy life.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), Latvia is involved in Eurostars (FP7), Joint Baltic Sea Research and Development Programme (BONUS) (FP7/Horizon 2020) and Eurostars2 (Horizon 2020). In the context of FP7, Latvia was also active in two joint technological initiatives: ARTEMIS and IMI.

The funding of supported activities under article 185 (BONUS and Eurostars programmes) amounted to approximately 0.16 % of total public RTD funding in 2013.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination of national and regional research programmes. The country participates in teh ERA-Nets projects, which help to coordinate the activities of participating countries. The country also participates in three ERA-Net Plus actions, which have high European added value and additional EU financial support to facilitate joint calls for proposals between national and/or regional programmes.

Latvia has no other joint research agenda within ERA.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with the third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. A small-scale joint research cooperation programme is running with Belarus, where the selection of bilateral cooperation projects is based on the evaluation of the proposals at national level with a subsequent joint decision by both parties. A trilateral cooperation between Latvia, Lithuania and Taiwan has also been active for 13 years. The small mobility programme 'Osmoze' between Latvia and France has been available for researchers since 2002.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Latvia allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is equal to 0. However, it is positive in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer review standards is not supported. No attempts have been made to accept the mutual recognition of evaluations that complies with international peer-review standards as a basis for national funding decisions.

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of joint programmes are only applied by Latvian funding ministries in particular cases where such need is necessary, like Article 185 BONUS and EUROSTARS, Article 187 ARTEMIS, ERA-NETs and ERA-NETs Plus, or within the EUREKA Framework.

Funding ministries do not implement 'Money follows cooperation', which is a scheme that enables small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. Neither of the funding ministries implement 'Money follows researchers', which is a scheme that enables researchers to move to a research institution in a different country to transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to the original terms and objectives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

Research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

For the time being, Latvia is not a member of any international or European scientific organisation. However, in terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of four of them. Latvia also plans to be involved in the following ESFRI research infrastructure projects: BBMRI, CLARIN, ESS Survey, ESSneutron and EU-OPENSCREEN.

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of four of them.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Latvia is currently not involved in any of the consortia that adopt the legal framework designed by the European Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures, Latvia does not yet have any national roadmap for national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest. The Latvian Academy of Sciences is responsible for the development of such a document, which is still under process in 2014. In such a situation, no financial commitments to European and international research infrastructures have yet been allocated.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Policies facilitating cross-border access to research infrastructures are not present in Latvia and, accordingly, no direct financial support is available from the national budget. Benefit from the transnational access to research infrastructures is, however, possible through the relevant FP7 projects that offer competitive fellowships, as well as through nationally funded research projects.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Latvia in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Latvia Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and the recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 3.947 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Latvia in 2011. This represents 3.8 researchers per 1 000 labour force compared with 3.0 among the Innovation Union reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 1.8 in Latvia, compared with 9.0 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 61 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Vacancies for academic positions and top-level positions in publicly funded scientific institutions and publicly funded higher education institutions (HEIs)are advertised in the official newspaper Latvijas Vestnesis (Latvian Herald) (online newspaper since 1 January 2013). The EURAXESS jobs portal provides a link to the official newspaper. Institutions may take additional measures in order to advertise job vacancies.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The implementation of the ‘European Charter for Researchers’ and the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers’ is not directly promoted at national level.

By May 2014, one Latvian organisation was involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers.

A number of Latvian universities have implemented dedicated study programmes (Master and doctoral studies) aimed at promoting researchers’ skills sets and career prospects, including inter-sectoral cooperation and mobility.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.0 in 2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In 2009/2010, the University of Latvia and the Riga Technical University set up doctoral schools. The European Social Fund (ESF)-supported activities also aim to increase the quality of doctoral training. The ESF co-funded activity 'Support for the implementation of doctoral study programmes (2007-2013)' offered doctoral studies free of charge on a competitive basis. There is no formal bar on foreign students applying for state-funded PhDs in Latvia; in practice, language barriers are a disincentive.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 0.4 % in Latvia compared with 1.7 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 0.2 % in Latvia compared with 2.0 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The ESF co-funded activities promote the return of Latvian researchers and the involvement of foreign researchers. For example, the involvement of mobile researchers is one of the criteria for the evaluation of grant proposals in the context of the ESF activities within the field of higher education and science.

One of the strategic objectives of the 'Commercialisation of science and transfer of technologies' (European Regional Development Fund, ERDF 2010-2015) is to boost the exploitation of science and the transfer of technologies by promoting cooperation between research and industry in the implementation of industrial research projects (applied research), and the development of new products and technologies.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Gender equality in public research in Latvia falls under the Labour Act, which provides formal equal opportunities for men and women, and restricts discrimination against women in employment. The law notably stipulates that a woman who makes use of maternity leave shall have her previous job ensured or, if this is not possible, a similar or equivalent position with no less favourable conditions and employment provisions.

Due to austerity measures that have had to be taken since 2009, there is a very limited institutional funding of research in Latvia. In such a situation, the female research community is much more vulnerable: practically, due to very high level of project-based competitive funding, it appears to be difficult for managers to solve the issues of maternity leave and the return problems in a decent and appropriate way.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

According to Latvian laws, on the one hand, there are no legal barriers that hinder the recruitment, career retention and progression of female researchers, which is why, on the other hand, there is no legal framework for female careers specifically in research in Latvia, or any specific measure that targets female researchers. In terms of maternity leave, the current situation is controversial: the law theoretically guarantees the restoration of the same position, but managers usually have no resources to satisfy this legal duty. When working in the framework of a fixed-term contract, it is, for the same reason, difficult to receive an extension of the contract due to maternity leave.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Regarding the measures supporting the gender dimension in research programmes and projects in Latvia, European Structural and Investment Funds co-fund activities aiming at promoting gender equality in the field of research. The promotion of gender equality is one of the criteria for the evaluation of grant proposals.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 52.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 17.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

There are no examples of policy actions or regulation acts that are specific to the research sector promoting equal gender representation in academic and research committees, boards and governing bodies, etc. in Latvia. There are, however, some rare cases where funders set specific conditions in their calls for proposals.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 60 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Latvia is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, there is no national initiative. This means that the Latvian research funders have no specific policies on open access, but in order to gain more visibility for their work and more impact on international research, scientific institutions and researchers publish in open access journals and repositories. The University of Latvia is a partner in the OpenAIRE project. In fact, measures supporting open access to research publications and data (online and free access) have mostly been implemented as a result of FP7 projects.

Related to open access to publications, the free access granted to scientific research for specific sectors (e.g. the academic sector) and for the results of publicly funded research is only the result of the implementation of FP6 and FP7 projects.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in open access amongst research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, there is no policy or support in Latvia, except in relation to FP7 projects.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support open access to data.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, there is no specific national infrastructure in Latvia than the one developed in the frame of the Open AIRE project.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, Latvia has developed a knowledge transfer strategy, which aims at fostering an open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. During the period 2007-2013, the strategy was funded with structural funds under the framework of the EU regional policy. It was implemented, monitored and controlled by the Ministry of Economics, who was also in charge of providing information to the public on the implementation of this programme. The Latvian Investment and Development Agency was a cooperation organisation responsible for the operational tasks: establishing the evaluation committee, launching calls for proposals, signing contracts, etc. The call for proposals was launched in 2008 for the period of 2008-2013.

The programme operated via competitive multiannual grants allocated to higher education institutions and research institutes for the establishment and operation of technology transfer offices. Eight technology transfer units were embedded in HEIs (University of Latvia, Riga Technical University, Ventspils University College, Rezekne Higher Education Institution, Latvia University of Agriculture, Riga Stradins University, Daugavpils University, Laboratory of Design innovation and technologies at the Art Academy of Latvia). Leading scientists from the major universities of Latvia, together with 50 innovative entrepreneurs, teamed up in order to establish a technology transfer centre for innovative products.

In applying the EU structural funds rules, the Ministry of Economics has supported the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programme.

Funding organisations do not support strategic partnerships and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry in Latvia.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 92.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 24.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 5.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Latvia who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, it is quite high in the cluster limited compliance to ERA.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. It is also quite high in the cluster limited compliance to ERA.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. It is also quite high in the cluster limited compliance to ERA.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Latvia has not set up any strategy. However, through the Latvian Academic Identity Federation (LAIFE), Latvia is a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations. LATNET is the Latvian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Concerning digital services, the country provides cloud services (NREN service implementation support).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 56.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 30.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Latvia is not a member of an identity federation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 54.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 14 research performing organisations in Latvia answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 29.4 % of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Latvia shows that 21.4 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 64.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 14.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 56.6 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 37.8 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Procedures for evaluation, financing and management of fundamental and applied research projects || || ||

Regulation on support for science and research || 2009 || ||

Rules of the Latvian Council of Science Competitive research grants || 2006 || ||

Guidelines on Research, Technology Development and Innovation for 2014-2020 || 2013 || X || X

Establishment of national research centres || 2012 || X ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Law on Research Activity Procedures for the allocation of Institutional funding to State Scientific Institutions, State Institutions of HE and the Scientific Institutes of State Institutions of HE || 2005 || ||

Methodology and criteria for international assessment of public and private scientific institutions || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Procedures for the Provision of State aid for participation in international collaborative programmes in research and technology || 2008 || ||

Bilateral cooperation programmes with Belarus, Ukraine and France Trilateral cooperation programmes with Lithuania and Taiwan || 2009 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Regulations on development of the research infrastructure || 2010 || ||

Science in Latvia || 2010 || ||

Attractive careers

Law on immigration and research activity regulating contracts with foreign researchers. || 2008 || ||

Attraction of Human Resources to Science (ERDF 2009-2015) || 2008 || ||

Regulation on support to the implementation of doctoral programmes and postdoctoral research || 2009 || ||

Support for implementation of PhD studies (scholarship programme funded by ERDF) || 2008 || ||

Euraxess Latvia || 2009 || ||

Development of Human Resources in Scieujknce (ERDF support for development of new research groups). || 2008 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Labour Law || 2001 || ||

Concept paper on Gender Equality implementation Plan for Gender Equality implementation in 2012-2014 || 2012 || X ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Competitive VEGA grants || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

 Programme for Technology transfer contact points || 2009 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN (Membership through LAIFE) || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry for Education and Employment. Within the framework of the Ministry, the Malta Council for Science and Technology (MCST) is the body responsible for developing, implementing and managing research and innovation policy and the national funding programme. Malta Enterprise, which answers to the Ministry of Economy, Investment and Small Business, is the national development agency responsible for supporting the private sector and operates a number of research and development (R&D) schemes. Malta’s research landscape is relatively small with one public university, the University of Malta, which is the main research performer in the higher education sector, and one public research organisation, the Malta Aquaculture Research Centre. There are four public funding organisations in Malta: the Ministry for Finance,which allocates institutional funding to the University of Malta and government departments; the Planning and Priorities Coordination Division within the Ministry for European Affairs, which manages the allocation of EU structural funds, the MCST, which manages the national research and innovation programme and the Commercialisation Programme and Malta Enterprise, which manages a combination of national funds and EU structural funds.

The National Research and Innovation (R&I) Strategy 2020, which was adopted in February 2014, outlines Malta’s R&D priorities between 2014 and 2020. It identifies eight areas for smart specialisation and aims at promoting the ERA objectives. The National R&I Strategy will be complemented by an R&I Action Plan, which will identify specific measures and timelines up to 2020 for achieving the objectives outlined in the National R&I Strategy. The National R&I Strategy will also be implemented through the Technology Development Programme (formerly known as the National R&I Programme), which provides R&D grants.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Malta represented EUR49 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR179 in EU-28). In 2013, GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR46. In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.7 % of total government expenditures and 0.3 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in Malta has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Malta even when it declined from the EU-28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based funding is allocated a competitive basis through the Technology Development Programme (formerly known as the National R&I Programme). The Technology Development Programme provides R&D grants for projects jointly undertaken by industry and academia. The annual budget for Malta's national research and innovation programme amounted to approx. Euro 1.4 million in 2013.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are implemented within the framework of the Technology Development Programme, although it is not clear whether international peers are systematically used. All proposals are submitted in English.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is never allocated based on institutional assessment. There are no institutional assessments of the University of Malta or the public research centre and the allocation of institutional funding is therefore not based on performance.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Malta faces the issues of a small country with limited R&D capacity and funding to engage in cross-border cooperation. The National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 emphasises the need to focus cross-border cooperation in the eight areas identified for smart specialisation. However, the strategy does not provide specific policies or actions supporting joint research activities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 28.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 28.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Malta allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Malta dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation by Malta of the total participation is 0.2 % and the country received 0.05 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR42 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 9.6 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period). Given the relative short history of R&D policy in Malta, the majority of efforts have been directed towards Malta’s participation in the EU's Framework Programme. The National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 further supports Malta’s participation to the EU Framework Programme.

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in two of the ten ongoing initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in one programme. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in one of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of eight ERA-Nets, of which four are currently still running. The country also has participated in ERA-Net Plus actions in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Malta has a cooperation agreement with CERN and also signed a cooperation agreement in 2012 with the European Space Agency. Discussions are currently taking place with the European Biology Molecular Laboratory (EMBL) with a view to eventually signing a bilateral agreement.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, no measures are reported.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting international cooperation with third countries. RPOs responding to the survey did not receive any funding from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

In terms of mutual recognition of evaluations, no measures are reported.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting the allocation of project-based funding on peer reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Malta allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is equal to 0.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Malta participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA and EFDA.

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of two of them (4 %). Malta is a member of DARIAH and BBMRI. The country coordinates none of them.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, Malta has contributed EUR4 500 for DARIAH and EUR 20 657 for BBMRI in 2014.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Malta participates in BBMRI ERIC, one of the seven consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures, Malta does not have a national roadmap for infrastructures. The National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 supports investment in research infrastructures linked to Malta’s thematic specialisations. The strategy also indicates Malta’s intention to participate in the development of pan-European research infrastructures by linking it with identified priority themes and investments in national research infrastructures. However, no funding is ring-fenced for the construction and operation of ESFRI, global, national and regional RIs of pan-European interest. The construction of the Life Sciences Centre may be considered a first step towards the development of a national research infrastructure.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 includes a recommendation supporting Maltese researchers’ access to research infrastructures of interest outside Malta.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Malta in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Malta _Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 759 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Malta in 2011. This represents 4.2 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2012, 55 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Public service and public sector research vacancies are not published on Europe-wide platforms and there are no plans at present to publish public service and public sector jobs on EURAXESS. However, the University of Malta advertises its vacancies online on its own website and its job vacancies are available through EURAXESS.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Maltese government has not yet actively promoted the implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ by research institutions and funders. It is in the process of identifying measures to promote its adoption. However, the institutions are implementing many of the provisions of the ‘Charter & Code’. The new National R&I Strategy 2020 refers explicitly to the 'Charter & Code', and recommends their adoption by public employers and research funders.

The Malta Council for Science and Technology provides support to researchers to participate in Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) projects and the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme. The University of Malta has developed a career stream for researchers. In addition, academic members of staff have a clear career progression from assistant lecturer all the way through to the level of professor, and they are contractually bound to undertake research activities for one third of their time.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.3 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Maltese government has not put in place any measures to increase the quality of doctoral training and has not developed a specific Skills’ Agenda. However, the University of Malta is participating in a European Social Fund (ESF) project that will result in offering a masters’ course in entrepreneurship, as well as establishing a Business Incubation Centre at the University of Malta. The Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI) was set up in May 2013 as a centre of excellence in entrepreneurship at the University of Malta (UoM), complementing the existing endeavours in the area. As an academic centre, CEBI trains students and staff in the science and art of entrepreneurship using a participant-centred, hands-on approach by leveraging entrepreneurship expertise at the University of Malta, as well as with experienced local and foreign entrepreneurs. In July 2013, CEBI launched an intensive training programme in entrepreneurship, in collaboration with Isis Innovation. The development of this programme has been supported through the ESF project. A total of around 50 students are following the Programme.

The new National R&I Strategy 2020 focuses mainly on the importance of nurturing a researcher pool with awareness, expertise and experience in both the academic and business camps, which benefits both the individual's career path as well as further industry development. In addition, the strategy also emphasises the importance of coupling the drive towards increasing the number of doctoral and post-doctoral graduates with a drive to attract research initiatives to Malta to provide career opportunities for new researchers.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 4.1 % in Malta compared with 4.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.4 % in Malta compared with 5.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The Maltese government has not put in place any measures to attract and retain leading national, EU and third-country researchers. The STEPS programme provided funding for doctoral candidates to pursue studies either in Malta or overseas. The same rationale applies for the Master It! programme. The Malta Government Scholarship Scheme (MGSS) also allows awardees to pursue their studies abroad, in addition to supporting those students who opt to conduct part of their assignment at world-renowned research institutes.

The Malta Council for Science and Technology provides state financing in the form of grants for research, development and innovation in science and technology through the National R&I Programme, which was set up in 2004. One of the eligibility conditions of the National Research and Innovation Programme is that proposals may only be submitted by consortia that involve both an academic and an industry partner, thus leading to better links between these two sectors.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The Gender Equality Action Plan 2009-2010 included a number of measures aiming at achieving gender equality; however, no follow-up measures were proposed after it expired in 2010. No measures addressing gender equality in research are reported besides general legislation and/or soft measures.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 95 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average. Within the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing organisations having adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Regarding careers and working conditions in public research for female researchers, there are no reported measures.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

As regards gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no reported measures.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average. Also, RPOs did not include the gender dimension in research contents.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

As regards gender balance in decision-making, there are no reported measures.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

There seems to be no gender balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers among responding research performing organisations nor gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 highlights the need to support open access to publications resulting from publicly-funded research. However, there is currently no overall legislative or policy framework supporting open access. Malta is a participant in the OpenAIRE Plus project.

Related to open access to publications, the National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 promotes the use of open access to publications resulting from publicly-funded research. Publications arising from projects funded under the National R&I Programme have to be deposited in an open access repository at the moment of publication. The electronic copy shall become freely available to all within six months of publication. However, it is not clear to what extent this requirement in the National R&I Programme is monitored and enforced. Open access-related costs are not included in the list of eligible costs in the programme.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 95 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average. No RPO who answered the survey indicated that they have publications in OA.

Concerning open access to data, the National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 supports open access to scientific data, however the strategy does not make any specific recommendations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Malta who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to supporting Open Access to data.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster, the share of research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

As regards to repositories, there are no reported measures.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private sectors, knowledge transfer has been acknowledged as a priority in both the National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 and Malta’s 2014 National Reform Programme. Knowledge transfer has been at the core of Malta’s National R&I Programme, which funds projects that are jointly undertaken by industry and academia. One of the eligibility criteria is that the project consortia should include both academia and industry partners. Projects financed by the National R&I Programme also need to demonstrate a strong commercialisation potential. In addition, Malta Enterprise runs several schemes (e.g. advisory services for researchers in search of venture capital, loans for highly qualified personnel, royalty income from patents) supporting public-private cooperation in the field of industrial and experimental development. Malta has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.

Regarding support to technology transfer offices (TTOs), the professionalisation of the KT office at the University of Malta Technology has been supported by the Entrepreneurship Training Programme. This programme, which runs between 2011 and 2014 and is funded under the ESF, aims at increasing awareness and providing training related to knowledge transfer and intelIectual property rights (IPR).

The knowledge transfer office at the University of Malta - which was set up in 2010 - and the development of Malta's Life Sciences Centre - which is a state-of-the-art industrial park dedicated to the life sciences sector - constitute important steps towards the development of strong public-private linkages. The Malta Life Sciences Centre will include the BioMalta campus, which will be a bio-medical cluster between the University of Malta, Mater Dei Hospital and the life sciences industry. Moreover, the Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI), set up in May 2013 at the University of Malta, will act as both a business incubator to support spin-offs and a catalyst for seed and venture capital funds. The University of Malta has also published guidelines to regulate the joint ownership of intellectual property resulting from academic research. Given that these measures are fairly recent, it is still too early to assess their effectiveness.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Malta who responded to the survey and support KT, OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster..

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, there seems to be no research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the draft National R&I Strategy 2011-2020 highlights the need to include e-infrastructures in the development of a national roadmap for research infrastructures. The University of Malta is a partner of the EU-funded project GÉANT serving Europe’s research and education community. The country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. UoM-CSC is the Maltese National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. Malta has not set up a strategy for the implementation of Digital ERA.

As regards digital services, no measures are reported.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Malta, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is hihgher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Malta was not a member of an identity federation in either 2011 or 2013. The country is not member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Latvia, there seems to be no provision of digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.).

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 3 research performing organisations in Malta answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 79.9% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Malta shows that n.a. % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 33.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 66.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are n.a. % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 99.3 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.7 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

In particular, one RPO concentrates the overwhelming majority of R&D personnel, which explains the particularly high or low percentages for some of the indicators.

For the indicator ‘Share of funders which can base their project based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions’, it should be noted that the mutual recognition of peer reviews is outside the scope of Malta’s national R&D programme/policy and hence it is not implemented by funders.

For the indicator ‘Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations’, the main RPO did not provide an answer to this question.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X

R&I Action Plan || 2014 || X || X

Technology Development Programme || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

National Research and Innovation (R&I) Programme (renamed the “Technology Development Programme” in 2014) || 2004 || ||

Attractive careers

Euraxess Malta || 2004 || ||

The Malta Government Scholarship Scheme (MGSS) || 2006 || ||

Endorsement of the Charter by the Office of the Prime Minister || 2005 || ||

Setting up of a post-doctoral scheme and community at the University of Malta (part of Malta's 2011-2015 NRP) || || ||

STEPS scheme || 2009 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X

Rules for participation in the National Research and Innovation Programme || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

University of Malta knowledge transfer office  - Entrepreneurship Training Programme || 2011 || ||

Life Sciences Centre/BioMalta Campus || || ||

Centre for Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation (CEBI) || 2013 || X || X

National Research and Innovation Strategy 2020 || 2014 || X || X

Malta Enterprise R&D incentives schemes (e.g. Loan for Highly Qualified Personnel, Industrial Property Rights Costs for SMEs Scheme, Industrial Research and Experimental Development Scheme) || 2007 || ||

Technology Transfer Office at the University of Malta and University Trust Fund || 2009 || ||

National Research and Innovation (R&I) Programme (renamed the “Technology Development Programme” in 2014) || 2012 || X ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Parliament, the Cabinet and the Ministries. There are different coordination mechanisms at this level. A dedicated Cabinet council called the Economic Affairs, Infrastructure and the Environment Subcommittee (REZIM) is concerned with issues related to the economy, science and research policies, higher education and innovation, and consists of the ministers most closely involved with these matters. Its counterpart at ministry level is called the Economic Affairs, Infrastructure and Environment Committee (CEZIM). For consultations between Parliament and the Cabinet, both the Upper and Lower House have a Committee for Education, Culture and Science. On both these levels there is an Economic Committee addressing innovation.

Different ministries play a role in implementing these policies, by means of different instruments and with the help of specific actors in the innovation system. The most prominent ministries involved, as reflected in the budget to be allocated, are the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ). The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science has broad political-administrative and financial responsibility for public-sector research in the Netherlands. Most of its budget is in the form of institutional funding. The Ministry of Economic Affairs is responsible for facilitating a competitive business climate and primarily addresses industry-orientated research and development (R&D) and innovation.

Funding bodies:

The main actors and institutions responsible for allocating funds for research and innovation in the universities are the responsible ministries, OCW and EZ, and a group of main funding bodies: the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) for scientific research and the Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO.nl) (the latter allocates financing instruments that are aimed at industrial research, innovation and collaborative projects). Funding for scientific research in Dutch universities is provided along three routes:

 1) Institutional funding, mainly by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science for the higher education institutions (HEIs) (including university hospitals with involvement from the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports). Institutional funding of the Agricultural University of Wageningen by the Ministry of Economic Affairs;

2) Competitive funding based on scientific excellence by the NWO and KNAW both KNAW and NWO also fund their own institutes;

3) Project-based funding from different sources like industry, foundations and international organisations.

KNAW primarily funds its own institutes but also offers limited competitive funding for some programmes (and prizes/awards). Research is also funded by some ministries own knowledge institutes, and by their policy-oriented research.

Public research organisations for applied research are partly financed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, other ministries and partly by private organisations for applied research.

The country has adopted a national strategy for research and innovation which consists of two dedicated policies addressing research and innovation. These are described in the corresponding policy documents 'Quality in diversity - Strategic Agenda for Higher Education, Research, and Science' (to be renewed in the fall of 2014 by the new vision on Science Policy) and 'To the Top - Towards a new Industrial Policy' (2011), the specific part of the new Enterprise Policy.

The nine Top Sectors of the Enterprise Policy should (among other things) promote the synergy and coherence of research and innovation activities on economic and social priorities, and foster public-private cooperation and leverage private investments. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are stimulated by means of the TKI supplement (named after the 19 'top consortia for knowledge and innovation' that commenced the implementation of Top Sector research roadmaps) and the MIT (MKB Innovatiestimulering Topsectoren), the latter targeting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

The new Innovation Policy has coincided with the start of a major shift from direct funding of research and innovation to indirect funding by fiscal measures. Thus, investments in private R&D are stimulated primarily by tax measures, notably from 2012 onwards. Additional funds are available for the Top Sectors (TKI supplement) and for fundamental research; the latter will continue to be allocated competitively based on scientific excellence and mainly by the research council NWO. The shift in the funding of business R&D could lead to a larger share of user-inspired types of fundamental and applied research in the Netherlands’ overall research output, with more short-term economic and societal impact.

The government of the Netherlands has an instrument for the periodic review of selected national policies areas. The aim is to identify various policy options and possibilities for future savings, and to achieve more value for money based on ex ante and ex post evaluations. During such a review, the Ministry of Finance, the ministry in charge of the policy area and independent organisations are brought together to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing policy tools. A recent review of the science policy reconfirmed the relevance of the national science policy and proved the effectiveness and efficiency of the policy tools under consideration. Therefore, on the basis of this evidence it was concluded that the science system works well and that no general revision is needed. However, there may be areas where adjustments would be desirable to make operating the system more 'future proof'. The conclusions will be taken up in the new vision on Science Policy, which will appear in the fall of autumn 2014.

The effect of the Top Sector policy on fundamental research will be closely monitored by the Advisory Council on Science and Technology Policy (AWT), which will issue a second monitoring report by the end of 2014.

N.W.O and KNAW are also working on new strategies.

The Netherlands has a Country Specific Recommendation: 'Protect expenditure in areas directly relevant for growth such as education, innovation and research'.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in the Netherlands represented EUR 279 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR274. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.5 % of total government expenditure (total government expenditure provides a partial indication of the effort made by national public authorities on R&D as they do not account for the substantial fiscal measures) and 0.8 % of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in the Netherlands has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed in the Netherlands but less than the evolution observed in the  EU-28.

However, the GBOARD does not show the complete picture for the Netherlands. Apart from direct support to R&D, indirect support by fiscal measures (tax benefits) plays an important role in the Netherlands. The sum of direct and indirect support has increased over the period 2007-2012 and was close to 1 % of GDP in 2012. In 2013 fiscal measures were slightly over EUR one billion on a total direct and indirect government expenditure on R&D and innovation of almost EUR six billion.

According to the Rathenau report 'Total investment in Research & Innovation 2012-2018' the government continues its R&D funding largely through institutional funding. The share of project funding will decrease in the coming years according to the multiannual budget from 29 to 24 %, and the share of institutional funding will increase from 71 to 76 % in 2018.

The effectiveness and efficiency of the Dutch research system is also being pursued by introducing new competitive funding elements in the education agenda of the universities. From the institutional funding for education, 7 % of the budget for education by universities is performance-based. Furthermore, the number of PhDs a year is also part of the institutional funding of the universities and is a performance criteria. Other notable changes in the funding of research in the Dutch research system include the increasing proportion of competitive funding for applied research, more money for participation in European research programmes and the TKI supplement, which can be used for research projects (but always in collaboration with public research institutes). The competitive funding for fundamental research through N.W.O grants is being continued.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Both the Enterprise Policy and the research agenda are orientated towards competitive forms of funding. The new or updated measures for competitive funding (institutional and project-based), as presented in the 2014 budget agreement, include the following:

•           TKI supplement: In 2013, the 19 Top Consortia for Knowledge and Innovation (TKIs) started organising the research agenda of their own sectors. Organisations who wish to participate in research projects and innovation activities coordinated by TKIs can provide funding for public-private research projects. Companies should provide cash or (starting in 2014) in kind means for at least 40 % of the project cost. This private investment then generates the TKI supplement – equal to 25 % of the project cost – which the TKI can subsequently use for additional research, development and innovation projects.

•           The government will gradually increase spending on fundamental research to EUR 100 million, for both independent research and the fundamental research carried out in the joint programmes with the Top Sectors. The increased spending started at EUR 25 million in 2014, rising to EUR 75 million in 2015, 2016 and 2017, and reaching EUR 100 million from 2018.

The NWO contributed EUR 235 million to fundamental/basic research themes drawn by the private sector and the government in the Top Sector Innovation Contracts during the period 2012-2013. In accordance with the coalition agreement in 2012, the NWO is expected to designate EUR 275 million for excellent basic research in the Top Sectors in 2015, from it’s total means of EUR 625 million.

•           The Gravity (Zwaartekracht) programme offers additional institutional funding for top research consortia in the Netherlands. This is competitive institutional funding for a maximum of ten years and aims to support outstanding research in consortia with top researchers from various universities and research institutes. 

To increase the effectiveness and efficiency of publicly funded institutes for applied research (TO2), the government published a vision on the methods and governance in 2013. The way forward in these areas requires new and more cohesive methods in programming and conducting this research, methods which are more closely tailored to the top sector policy and future challenges. In 2014, the TNO will be releasing a new strategic plan and all other applied research institutions (TO2) have produced a joint strategic framework that has been sent to Parliament in July.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 89.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The Dutch Science System has as a basis for its evaluation the national Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. This lays down four main assessment criteria: quality, productivity, feasibility/vitality and societal relevance. A separate international committee is appointed to evaluate each institute, working on the basis of a self-evaluation report from the institute and a site visit. The most recent evaluations of the NWO and KNAW are being conducted in 2014. In addition, the KNAW and NWO institutes, as well as university groups, are also evaluated. A new evaluation protocol was published in March 2014.  The principles of peer-review depend on the funding organisation: these are mainly the NWO for scientific research and the RVO for industrial research.

NWO

The core principles of peer-review are that all funding provided by the NWO is based on international peer-review standards. The implementation of international peer-review standards is described in detail in the application guides, through website information for applicants and strategy documents.

Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO)

The RVO, formerly Agency NL, is responsible for implementing innovation policy measures, including the tax benefits WBSO and RDA. It also collects most of the data associated with these policies, which are often the basis for evaluating of the individual instruments. The performance of the RVO itself is measured by a number of operational indicators and targets, which are stated in the annual contract between the RVO and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

HEI:

The effectiveness and efficiency of the Dutch research system is also being pursued by introducing new competitive funding schemes for the education agenda in the universities. As the institutions are autonomous, performance agreements were agreed in the autumn of 2012 with mechanisms for financial sanctions. Seven per cent of the university budget for the education agenda for 2012-2016 is performance-based rather than via institutional funding. This relates only to the institutional funding for universities, thus excluding the funding through the N.WO, which is all allocated by means of competition. As of 2013, additional resources are available for quality and profile, representing about 7 % of educational funding. Of this, 5 % is for quality (conditional funding) and 2 % for profile (selective budget). The funding in the period 2013-2016 will be awarded on the basis of the performance agreements with individual universities and colleges. For education and academic achievement (quality), an amount of EUR 200 million will be available in 2013, rising to EUR 245 million in 2016.

Public Research Organisations (PROs):

The Dutch Science System has as a basis for its evaluation the national Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. This lays down three main assessment criteria: research quality, relevance to society and viability (being equipped for the future). An international committee is appointed to evaluate each institute, working on the basis of a self-evaluation report from the institute and a site visit. Judgement by an international committee is both qualitative and quantitative and provides recommendations. Furthermore, the committee also evaluates the PhD programmes and research integrity. The most recent evaluations were conducted in 2013. 

Top Sectors:

Developments related to the Top Sectors are being monitored on a continuous basis. After the introduction of the report by the Theeuwes commission (on evaluation methodology), several instrument evaluations (i.e. WBSO, Innovation Credit) have adopted the new guidelines for evaluation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 7.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 11.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in the Netherlands allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in the Netherlands dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of participation of the Netherlands in the total participation is 6.9 % and the country received 8.4 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 181 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR72  per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 5.6 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Through the N.W.O the government has provided a stimulus for co-financing participation in European programmes (EUR36 million for 2014-2017).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in all ten of the ongoing initiatives and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food security, Agriculture and Climate Change (FACCE), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy diet for healthy life, The demographic change (More Years, better life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting climate knowledge for Europe (Clik'EU), Water challenges for a changing world, Healthy and productive seas and oceans, and Urban Europe - Global challenges, local solutions.

The NWO supports the participation with the European Science Foundation joint schemes (European Cooperative Research Projects and Eurocores programmes), COST actions, EUREKA and Joint Technology Initiatives. Furthermore, NWO participates in in the realisation of a joint strategy of European research councils and is involved in international/European fora and meetings about European joint programming, international research infrastructures etc. Joint research agenda's in Joint Programming Initiatives, ERA-nets, and article 169/185 networks are managed by the NWO.

The NWO also supports research and actions in the domain of several broad themes that relate to national and international agendas. The selection of these themes is based on an inventory of the priorities of the government, the TNO innovation programmes and European themes. In the period 2011-2014, they are: healthy living, water and climate, cultural and societal dynamics, sustainable energy, connecting sustainable cities and materials: solutions for scarcity.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes, and led one of them. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in all four of the existing initiatives: EDCTP, AAL, Eurostars and EMRP.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 105 ERA-Nets, of which 25 are currently still running. The country has also participated in eight ERA-Net Plus actions - of which five are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Joint research agendas and ERA-Net (Plus) networks form an important contribution to international research collaboration. The Dutch government has announced that EUR 150 million will be provided to strengthen fundamental research. A substantial portion of this sum could be used to facilitate participation in the European research programme, Horizon 2020. Also, the TKI supplement (EUR 101 million in 2014) will partially be used for co-financing EU projects.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has developed a specific policy, the bilateral agenda. The country monitors the implementation of cooperation programmes.

Additionally, NWO provides funding for several specific joint research projects for international research collaborations with prioritised scientific disciplines. In 2013, projects open for application were: Digging in the data challenge, CoCoon, Conflict and Cooperation in the Management of Climate Change, Open Research Area Plus – social sciences, collaboration with Brazil (CNPq, FAPESP), collaboration with India – Intelligent Grids, Indo-Dutch science industry collaboration – Computer Sciences, Social science collaboration: India-the Netherlands, Science industry cooperation: the Netherlands-China/Hé programme of innovation cooperation, collaboration with South-Africa: Astronomy and enabling technologies for astronomy.

KNAW has two large international collaboration programmes, with China and with Indonesia. Within these scientific collaborations, the following programmes are currently open and have some predefined priorities or joint research agendas:

• Scientific cooperation with China-Programme of Strategic Scientific Alliances (PSA), which is mainly for material sciences, biotechnology/drug research and environmental science (EUR1.36 million per year);

• Scientific Programme with Indonesia Netherlands (EUR10 million combined budget from KNAW and NWO for the duration of the programme).

Some of the competitive NWO- and KNAW, instruments support international research collaboration as well. All the funding provided by these research councils is subject to international peer-review assessment. NWO and KNAW also have several collaboration agreements for supporting visits, joint workshops and research projects, but without predefined priorities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in the Netherlands allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is similar to the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The NWO has several programmes supporting international collaboration (joint research agendas), researchers' mobility (Money follows researcher) and international exchanges (Money follows cooperation), which involve Memoranda of Understanding between the NWO and other research councils, and coordinated and joint evaluation procedures following international peer-review standards (lead agency approach, for example in the ORA Programme).

There is no information available about cross-border interoperability initiatives in relation to reporting requirements, intellectual property rights (IPR), or on specific provisions removing legal barriers/laws.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 83.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in the Netherlands allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The Netherlands participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO and ESRF. In 2012, the country contributed 1.2 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 18 of them. The country coordinates four of them: CLARIN-ERIC, DARIAH, LIFEWATCH and EATRIS.(37 %)

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, the Netherlands is committed to funding seven of them. They are: CLARIN-ERIC, ESSurvey, SHARE-ERIC, BBMRI,  KM3NeT, SKA, PRACE (ex HPC).

With regards to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, the Netherlands is involved in six of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the European Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest, which involve several European countries. The Netherlands is hosting SHARE-ERIC (until early 2013, then to Germany), CLARIN ERIC and EATRIS ERIC, and is a member of ESS ERIC, BBMRI-ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.

In terms of support for the development and implementation of research infrastructures, the Netherlands has contributed around EUR150 million since 2008 towards overall policy measures/strategies. The national roadmap on research infrastructures which was published in 2008 and updated in 2013, includes references as well as an appendix to the participation of The Netherlands in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap. In fact, most of them are part of or related to ESFRI.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to Research infrastructures, among the research infrastructures coordinated by The Netherlands, access to 26 of them has been funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for the Netherlands in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Netherlands Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and the recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 58 447 full time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the Netherlands in 2011. This represents 6.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 153.8 in the Netherlands compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 63 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies were publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

In the Netherlands, each institution is an autonomous employer with its own personnel and recruitment policies and no legal instrument exists to influence the autonomy of the institution. There is in some cases a statutory obligation to publish a job vacancy on relevant national online platforms.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science provides the universities and large companies with information about the ‘Charter & Code’ principles. The Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) endorsed the principles of the Charter & Code on behalf of all universities in the Netherlands.  Furthermore, the Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, the Maastricht University, Tilburg University, the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, the University of Amsterdam, the University of Twente and Utrecht University have signed the Charter & Code as an individual organisation.

By May 2011, 11 Dutch organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources (HR) Strategy for Researchers of which five had received the HR Excellence in Research logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

Clear career development provisions are negotiated individually throughout the recruitment process between the researchers and the university/public research institute. Some universities offer researchers the possibility of a route to a tenured position.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.9 in 2011, compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In 2009 and 2010, the NWO developed a programme to strengthen the Dutch PhD system at the request of the Minister for Education, Culture and Science, and in collaboration with the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) and the KNAW. Following the advice of an evaluation committee on the design of the first two rounds, the NWO decided to continue the graduate school programme. The NWO graduate programme creates an excellent educational and research environment for highly talented young researchers. It is a structural programme that offers schools a funding opportunity for the appointment of four PhD students. These PhDs form part of a school that, possibly in collaboration with an educational establishment, provides a coherent educational and research programme covering both the master’s and PhD routes.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship from another EU-27 Member State was 20.4 % in the Netherlands compared with 4.2 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 20.9 % in the Netherlands compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The government of the Netherlands does not provide funding for inward mobility, including the return of Dutch researchers from abroad. The NWO runs bilateral exchange programmes (for instance with Belgium, Germany, China, India, Japan, South Korea, etc.) that encourage scientific collaboration and the mobility of researchers. The NWO’s Rubicon Programme aims to stimulate young recently graduated PhD students to acquire international experience. The programme offers researchers, who have completed their doctorates in the previous year, the chance to gain experience at a top research institution outside the Netherlands for a maximum period of two years.

Universities, research institutions and industrial partners cooperate closely to create or support different tools to develop partnerships between academia and industry. For instance, the issue of encouraging researchers to move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa has been embedded in the Strategic Agenda for Higher Education and Science Policy and the National Innovation Strategy of the Netherlands. An example of inter-sectoral mobility being encouraged as a result of the Strategic Agenda and the National Innovation Strategy is the Dutch government’s 'top sector policy', which aims to boost the innovation climate and collaboration through the creation of public-private partnerships.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The Dutch Emancipation Policy (2013-2016) strives to enhance the empowerment of girls and women and the emancipation of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender (LGBT). The participation of women in public research is not explicitly addressed, but the need for gender balance in health care and health research is acknowledged and a number of measures for this policy area foreseen.

A cultural and institutional change on gender is supported by initiatives like Girls Day, the Charter Talent to the Top Foundation, and the Dutch Network for Women Professors.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 98.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

In the Netherlands, university boards and department chairs are responsible for stimulating gender policies. Dutch universities attract international talent and, according to the 2013 Innovation Union Scoreboard, the Dutch innovation system is the most innovative among EU Member States (EC 2013b). More and more research establishments have signed the Talent to the Top Charter, which had initially been established for business enterprises. 

The country has provisions for a balanced participation of women and men in research programmes and/or projects. It has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to support specifically female researchers.

Both the research councils NWO and KNAW run programmes devoted to encouraging women to pursue an academic career. Although almost half of Dutch PhD graduates are female, there are less women in higher academic functions. Gender equality in research is actively supported by a variety of means (e.g. emancipation policy grants, FOM bridging subsidies, Aspasia Programme, LEAP!).

The NWO Plural Programme aims to move more women at Dutch universities to a position as a lecturer in the area of Earth and Life Sciences (ALW).

Another NWO grant (Aspasia) is intended to encourage the promotion of female Vidi grant candidates to associate and full professorships. Aspasia ensures that more female assistant professors progress to the level of associate or full professor. Aspasia was set up together with the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU).

Athena is a grant scheme intended for female researchers who have received a Veni grant from NWO Chemical Sciences and the premium stimulates an appointment as assistant professor in permanent employment. Athena encourages the appointment of female researchers in chemistry at a university, or an equivalent fixed position at a research institute.

KNAW Merian Prize

A prize for awarding a woman who will inspire others to embark on a career in science or scholarship. The biennial prize is conferred on an outstanding female researcher working alternately in the social sciences or humanities and in science.

FOM-bridging subsidies

The Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM) promotes, coordinates and finances fundamental physics research in the Netherlands. It is an autonomous foundation responsible to the physics division of the national research council the NWO. Its annual budget is EUR 99,2 million. FOM supports the appointment of a woman in permanent employment in physics, for example after having worked in a university abroad or to bridge the wage gap between a lecturer and professor position. FOM can subsidise up to five years.

FOM/V network initiatives for female physicists - Minerva Prize (FOM)

With this scheme, the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM) encourages the visibility of women in physics in order to encourage more women physicists to remain in the scientific community. The Minerva Prize is one of the activities under the Fom/v-stimuleringsprogramme to promote female physicists.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 83.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Gender and women’s studies are taught at various Dutch universities and there is a Netherlands Association for Women’s Studies.

ZonMW (The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development), the division for medical research of the NWO, has published ‘Kleurstof’: a document on diversity issues in research (gender diversity but also diversity in terms of ethnic background, age, etc.)

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 47 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision-making, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) has defined targets for its own board and committees.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 32.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in the Netherlands is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access (OA), the current Dutch government supports the principles of access to and dissemination of scientific information, but does not intend to invest substantially in the furthering of open access and preservation. In November 2013, a letter was sent by the Cabinet to Parliament giving its vision on the further development of open access based upon the 'Golden Road'.  Nevertheless, access to (and preservation of) scientific information is being ensured by a variety of initiatives. These include the establishment of the NWO ‘incentive Fund Open Access’, the KNAW’s open access policy and its Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) initiative, the NARCIS scheme, and an e-depot.

Related to open access to publications, the national research council of the Netherlands (NWO) encourages research results acquired with NWO funding to be accessible to the public. It has an Incentive Fund Open Access, a pilot in the humanities for starting open access journals, and has launched a call for proposals for all disciplines served by NWO for starting open access journals. It should be noted that NWO also co-finances OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks) – a European project now turned into an organisation – focusing on open access publishing of books.

In the Netherlands, the scientific community and libraries are actively engaged in developing policies for open access. All Dutch research universities have one or more repositories, and from 2010, all articles by Dutch researchers in Springer journals will be made available via Open Access. Since 2005, all Dutch universities, the Netherlands Association of Universities of Applied Sciences, the KNAW, NWO, the Royal Library and SURF have signed the Berlin Declaration on open access to knowledge in the sciences and humanities.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 95.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 10.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support OA to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.

DANS (Data Archiving and Networked Services) encourages researchers to archive and reuse data in a sustained manner, e.g. through the online archiving system EASY. DANS also provides access, via NARCIS.nl, to thousands of scientific datasets, e-publications and other research information in the Netherlands. In addition, the institute provides training and advice, and performs research into sustained access to digital information. DANS ensures that access to digital research data keeps improving.

Research Data Netherlands is a collaboration between DANS and the 3TU. A datacentre was initiated in 2013.  Several universities and research institute have joined the Dutch Dataverse Network (DDN), jointly managing the international open source application Dataverse Network for archiving and opening up research data by the researchers themselves.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 22.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support OA to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research date systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, NARCIS (National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System) provides access to scientific information including (open access) publications from the repositories of all the Dutch universities, KNAW, NWO and a number of research institutes, and datasets from some data archives, as well as descriptions of research.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, the Netherlands has developed a Knowledge transfer strategy. It fosters an open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations and is implemented as follows. Following a EUR80 million subsidy programme, which has ended, knowledge transfer or, more broadly, valorisation is considered now as an integral part of the mission of Dutch higher education institutions as laid down in Dutch law (‘Third mission'). This is illustrated by the increased number of staff working in related activities and knowledge transfer capacities, which are increasingly acknowledged and rewarded in the human resources policies of the institutions. Furthermore, in the performance agreements between the government and the HEIs as agreed in autumn 2012, valorisation appears as one of the priorities. The implementation of the strategy is accompanied by a monitoring system. Funding organisations have specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer.

Funding organisations support the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities, a necessary condition to increase the rate of success of the programme. The NWO institutes have set up an Industrial Liaison Officers Network (ILO-net) where they regularly organise company contact days to encouraging collaboration between industry, government and civic society organisations.

Strategic partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported by funding organisations in the Netherlands. The Top Sector approach (part of the Enterprise Policy) has exacerbated the public-private cooperation, which used to be fragmented and temporarily financed between entrepreneurs, researchers and government. An example of a relevant measure is the Top Consortia for Knowledge and Innovation (TKI). TKIs were established in 2012 to coordinate and match public-private research, which includes the creation of linkages with European research programmes (such as Horizon 2020). Top Sectors also strategically collaborate in human capital agendas, better regulation and economic diplomacy, involving regional and local governments, thus building and maintaining a comprehensive, multilevel agenda for competitiveness and innovation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 72.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the Netherlands who responded to the survey and support national support to KT, OI, technology transfer offices (TTOs) and private-public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation with the implementation of Digital ERA, the Netherlands has not set up a strategy for its implementation. However, the country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible.

The usage of e-infrastructures is supported through the creation of SURF. SURF is a foundation for ground-breaking innovations in information and communication technologies (ICT), allowing researchers and higher education institutions to make optimal use of the potential of ICT and improve their quality. In accordance with the government's response to the advice by ICTRegie on ICT research, funds are made available for ICT-infrastructure such as computer networks (SURFnet, GigaPort), e-Science and high-performance computing.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services and premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 87.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Netherlands was a member of an identity federation in both 2011 and 2013. The country is a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the Netherlands, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 34 research performing organisations in Netherlands answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 34.3% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Netherlands shows that 50.0 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 46.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 3.1 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 88.2 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 11.7 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.1 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Three large technical universities did not reply to the survey, which diminishes the representativeness of the results of the research performance organisations.

For the indicator 'Share of total budget allocated as project based funding' it should be noted that part of the funding of RPO's is directly by ministries without intervention by any funding organisation. As a consequence the percentage is relatively high compared to official figures.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Intensifying budget for fundamental research || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015 (updated March 2014) || 2014 || X || X

Additional funds for fundamental research || 2013 || X || X

Competitive funding programs for research and innovation (NWO, KNAW and Agentschap NL) || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Improving the quality and profiles of Higher Education institutions || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Joint Research Projects Bio-based Economy || || ||

Co-funding for participation in European research programmes || 2013 || X || X

Top Sectors: 2013 update of innovation contracts || 2013 || X || X

Participation in Joint Programming, article 185 initiative, ERA NET+ || 2013 || X || X

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Bilateral agenda || || ||

NWO and KNAW programmes for international collaboration || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

NWO cooperation in research themes || 2013 || X || X

SME Innovation scheme topsectors || 2013 || X || X

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Dutch roadmap for large scale research facilities || 2013 || X || X

Update ESFRI roadmap || 2013 || X || X

Attractive careers

NWO Talent Scheme (Vernieuwingsimpuls) and other individual grant schemes || || ||

Measures to develop ERA in relation to HR Strategy for Researchers || || ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Emancipation policy 2013-2016 || 2013 || X || X

Gender balance in the decision-making process

NWO Aspasia Programme || || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

towards Golden open access in 2024 || 2013 || X || X

NARCIS - National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System || || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

TKI surcharge || 2013 || X || X

MBO Centres for Innovative craftsmanship, HBO Centers for entrepreneurs, RAAK programme || 2013 || X || X

"Technology Pact" to address skills shortages in technology || 2013 || X || X

MKB Innovation Scheme for Top Sectors (MIT) || 2013 || X || X

Valorisation and knowledge transfer by Higher Education institutions and NWO || 2012 || X ||

High Tech start up Fund || 2011 || ||

Technical Pact || 2013 || X || X

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

The Polish public research and development (R&D) sector went through major changes that result from numerous legislative acts adopted in 2010 (science reform) and 2011 (higher education reform) – altogether eight laws and 92 ordinances. They establish new institutions and rules. The Ministry of Science and Education (MNiSW) manages the science budget and supervises two key funding agencies: the National Science Centre (NCN), financing basic science projects, and the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBiR), financing applied research and innovative development. The MNiSW is assisted by the Committee for Science Policy (KPN) for priority setting and the Committee for Evaluation of Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN), evaluating the performance of public sector research performing organisations. The Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PARP) is an agency under the Ministry of Economy (MG), which distributes Structural Funds under the MG, but also other innovation-related measures. The Ministry of Regional Development (MRR) defines the policies and regulations related to the absorption of EU funds. Several other ministries have dedicated programmes, stimulating innovation and funding research projects in relevant sectors. The Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) is a non-governmental institution, partly funded from the science budget, the EU Structural Funds and other sources, that award research grants and scholarships.   

In 2011, 105 public higher education institutions (PHEIs) and 207 public research organisations (PROs) were actively conducting R&D activities as well as the Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN).

Since 2013, Poland has had a multi-annual research development and innovation (RDI) plan  –  The Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 'Dynamic Poland' – coordinated by the Ministry of Economy. The strategy is the highest level policy document related to RDI in Poland and sets quantifiable objectives in R&D funding, indicators to measure their fulfilment and delegates specific tasks to different governmental institutions. Among the R&D objectives listed are: adjust the structure and increase the effectiveness of public research expenditure in RDI; develop  international scientific and educational cooperation; develop infrastructure for research and knowledge transfer; support researchers’ mobility in the science and economy sectors; create a culture of innovative academic entrepreneurship; strengthen links between business and academia; use intellectual property rights, patents and scientific information effectively.        

The National Research Programme 'Foundations for the science and technology policy and innovation policy of the state' (NRP) that was issued in 2011 has set all-encompassing national R&D priorities.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Poland represented EUR 36 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28).  In 2012, total GBAORD corresponded to 0.8 % of total government expenditures and 0.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the rate of growth of total GBAORD in Poland has been higher than the rate of growth of total EU GBAORD. In terms of R&D efforts, the rate of growth of GBOARD in Finally, GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Poland even when it regressed at EU28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The Act on principles of science financing (2010) established financing modalities for NCN and NCBiR, assuring gradual increases in the allocated funding for competitive calls. The share of competitive, project base funding has increased from 44.63% in 2009 to a planned 63.79% in 2012 and 63.71% in 2013. In 2013, the ten programmes managed by NCN and the 23 programmes managed by NCBiR were distributing 54.25% of the science budget through open competitive calls. Besides those agencies, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW), the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) and the Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PARP) run five and respectively four and four research programmes. The NCBiR as well as the PARP fund research enterprises.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 92 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

National peer review is used by all the funders (NCN, NCBiR, MNiSW, FNP and PARP) and peer-review rules are defined by legislation or publicly available procedures and are compliant with international standards for peer-reviews. For NCN, the principles for excellence, impartiality, appropriateness for purpose/impact, as well as efficiency and speed,  are applied. The NCN also involves foreign reviewers in the evaluation of selected proposals. Transparency is a principle embedded in the Act on the principles for Science Funding, to be applied for all research funding organisations.           

The reliance on the core principles of peer-review is also required for all R&D funding that is distributed based on the Operational Programme 'Smart Growth' (POIR), in the framework of the distribution of the EU Structural Funds for 2014-2020.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is partly statutory (based on the number of researchers) and partly the result of an evaluation. In 2012, The MNiSW amended the standards for the institutional assessment of public R&D organisations (both universities and research institutes), promoting internationally significant research and the successful commercialisation of research results. Nationwide performance evaluations are managed by the newly established, independent Committee for Evaluation of Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN) and are based on transparent, pre-defined criteria. The detailed assessments include bibliometric measures (with numbers of publications taking into account impact factors of specific academic journals), scientific awards to researchers, patents, revenues from industry co-operation (such as commercialisation of research results) and external R&D funding, normalised by the numbers of R&D employees in an organisation. The first institutional evaluation using the new criteria was performed in 2013. The institutional assessments are carried out at the level of individual institutes and faculties. Among the 963 scientific institutions evaluated, 3.8% received the highest “A+” rank, and 31.9% were assigned to “A” category, while B- and C-ranked organisations will benefit from only limited institutional funding. It is planned that institutes classified in category C will be liquidated, commercialised or merged into other institutes. The next evaluation is planned to take place in 2017 with using new criteria tha are planned to be proposed in 2015-16, which will also involve researchers in the revision process. 

The MNiSW develops a nationwide online system POL-ON, which will make the results of institutional assessments publicly available alongside the bibliometric indicators.       

The Ministry has also set rules for selecting leading research institutions in each scientific discipline, the so-called KNOWs – National Leading Scientific Centres. The KNOW status (Centres of Excellence) is linked to an assessment exercise conducted every five years that evaluate research results, the relationship between the teaching process and the socio-economic environment, as well as a full financial report. The selected centres receive additional funding. This measure is reinforced by the 2014 National Reform Programme.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

The Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 'Dynamic Poland' includes among its R&D objectives the development of international scientific and educational cooperation. The National Research Programme contains a list of priority areas partially coinciding with the grand challenges. These are reflected in the Strategic Research and Development Programmes of NCBiR and the Resolution of the Council of NCN concerning priority areas for fundamental research. In 2013, a dedicated inter-disciplinary committee was set up to make recommendations on how funds for international research cooperation should be distributed by the MNiSW, while the R&D funding agencies NCN and NCBiR have had corresponding institutional arrangements since 2010. The future Operational Programme "Smart Growth" (POIR), which defines the rules for distributing the EU Structural Funds during the 2014-2020 period, includes measures to foster the internationalisation of Polish science through support for the creation of international research agendas and to stimulate cross-border R&D.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Poland allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Poland dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between the institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Poland's participation in the total participation is 1.9 % and the country received 1.1 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 10 per inhabitant (the EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.4 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in seven of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: A new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The Demographic change (More Years, Better Life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health and Water Challenges for a Changing world.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 61 ERA-Nets, of which 15 are currently still running. The country has also participated in nine ERA-Net Plus actions - of which six are still running - in areas with high European added value and received additional EU financial support to top up their joint call for proposals.

Poland has bilateral research agreements and cooperation programmes with the Czech Republic, Germany (Polish-German Foundation for Science), Israel, Luxembourg (Pollux programme) and Norway (Polish-Norwegian Research Fund). Funding within bilateral agreements is offered via the NCN and NCBiR dedicated programmes (e.g. HARMONIA).          

The Visegrad fund (between the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia) also provides research grants from a 'common pot' contribution from all the countries involved.           

Cross-border interoperability of national programmes is based on the Act on the principles of science financing (2010). There are standard procedures for co-funding Polish researchers from academia or industry to participate in international initiatives and using international peer review in national funding decisions.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. Poland has bilateral agreements with Singapore and Taiwan (with the co-funding managed by the NCBiR).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Poland allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards is illustrated by the programme "Ideas Plus", established by the MNiSW in 2010 and supporting the participants of the European Research Council (ERC) competition 'IDEAS', who did not qualify for funding from the ERC.   

It seems that the recent 2013 call for proposals for the POLLUX 'Innovation in Services' within the bilateral agreement with Luxembourg is based on a joint peer review evaluation process.    

No funders apply the so called 'lead agency' procedures, i.e. the 'Money cooperation' and 'Money follows researchers' schemes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 88.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Poland allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Poland participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA, ESRF, EU.XFEL and ILL. In 2012, the country contributed 2.5 % of GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 21 of them (42 %).

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, Poland is committed to funding four of them. They are: CLARIN, ESSurvey, XFEL and FAIR.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Poland is involved in four of the nine consortia, which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries. Poland is a member of CLARIN ERIC and ES Survey ERIC, and an observer in BBMRI ERIC and EURO-ARGO ERIC.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures (RIs), the highest level policy document, the Strategy for the Innovation and Efficiency of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 (2013) (SIEG) listed as one of the objectives the further development of RIs based on the Polish Roadmap of Research Infrastructure (PMDIB). Already in 2010 the Act on the principles of science financing established open competitive calls for large R&D infrastructure investments. Additionally, several ordinances of the Minister of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) (2010-2011) earmarked parts of the science budget for RIs, defined investment criteria and, selection modes involving peer-reviews, and opened up the competitions to business enterprises as well.

The MNiSW published the updated Polish Roadmap for Research Infrastructures in August 2014. The new roadmap includes 53 research projects, among which 30 are national projects and 23 are international ones, whilst 13 are already in their implementation phase. According to the MNiSW, the inclusion of the research projects in the Roadmap does not involve any financial commitment from public authorities. Moreover, no information on financial commitment is mentioned in the updated roadmap.

The 2014 National Reform Programme considers the establishment of research and innovation infrastructures, especially those of European interest, among its priorities. One of the implementing measures it announces is a draft legislative amendment adopted by the MNiSW to ensure more efficient financing of strategic research infrastructures, in line with the ERA actions and based on PMDIB. The draft amendment is expected to be adopted by the autumn of 2014.          

In the future POIR for 2014-2020, several measures address infrastructure investments, including dedicated funding for projects from the PMDIB with explicit requirements to ensure the availability of the funded RI to other organisations, and to prepare financial plans, taking into account the costs of set-up and maintenance, as well as the expected fees charged to external users.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to research infrastructures, the existing legal framework does not prevent foreign researchers from using the RIs in Poland. The POIR includes measures that would help optimise the use of existing Ris for applied research and development, especially jointly with business enterprises and international partners. Funding for Ris included in the national roadmap (PMDIB) requires that external access is facilitated, with clearly defined access policies and fees.

The MNiSW provides an exhaustive list on its website of the ESFRI projects implemented in Poland. In the meantime, the MNiSW continues the development of an online system POL-ON, which will publish detailed information about scientific organisations, including the availability of research infrastructures. In 2013, the NCBiR published legal interpretations online and offered tools that facilitate the commercial uses of publicly-funded Ris. Access to one the research infrastructures coordinated by Poland has been funded by the European Commission.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Poland in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Poland_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 64 133 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Poland in 2011. This represents 3.7 researchers per 1 000 labour force, compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 143.2 in Poland, compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 62% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The Law on Higher Education of 2011 requires Polish higher education institutions to publish job vacancies on the EURAXESS portal. A provision in the amended Law also states that all scientific posts in HEIs must be filled via a competition (Article 118a). This facilitates scientists’ careers and enables young scientists to have better access to grants (from the National Science Centre and the National Centre for Research and Development) through open competitions. Experts from both national and foreign science centres are able to participate in the competitions.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Polish government actively promotes the implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’ by research institutions and funders. By May 2014, 7 Polish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 4 had received the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

In 2011, the Polish government adopted the Long-Term Financial Plan for 2011-2014, which provides for a 30% salary increase for higher education employees, including researchers, over a three-year period, starting from 2013.

The number of older scientists strongly outnumbers young highly qualified researchers, preventing the latter from climbing the academic career ladder. This results in an outflow of young scientists from HE institutions and makes it hard for Polish science to compete with the best global centres. One of the changes introduced in the amended Law on Higher Education (2011) is a regulation stating that the contract of a nominated academic teacher must expire when they turn 65. The age limit for professors is 70.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 0.5 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Polish government introduced a financial incentive to provide more funding to around 30% of doctoral candidates. Doctoral programmes are evaluated by the Polish Accreditation Committee as part of an institutional assessment. The procedures for obtaining the doctoral degree have been made more transparent and quality-oriented. Measures to improve researchers’ competencies and skills, particularly those of young researchers, are included in the long-term Poland 2030 Strategy, the National Development Strategy 2020 as well as in the Human Capital Development Strategy adopted in June 2013.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 1.7% in Poland compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.9% in Poland compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2% (Researchers' Report, 2014).

The Foundation for Polish Science has a number of schemes to support inward mobility. The overall objective of the welcome Programme is to engage outstanding researchers from abroad in creating research teams in Poland and intensify the degree of international cooperation of Polish institutes and universities. The projects must be of at least three years’ envisaged duration. The objective of the homing plus Programme is to encourage young Polish scholars abroad to return to Poland. The programme is also open to young Doctors of Philosophy (PhDs) who are citizens of other countries but interested in taking up a post-doctoral fellowship in Poland. The project carried out under the programme may last from one to two years.

As prominent scientists and the best laboratories are dispersed all over the country, Poland needs science centres where the knowledge and  appropriate funding are clustered in order to raise the level of Polish science and to compete internationally. Leading National Research Centres (KNOWs) have existed since 2012 to fulfil this role, bringing together the best scientists, students and doctoral candidates. The KNOWs were selected via a competition in eight knowledge and education areas: liberal arts, social studies, science, technical studies, medical and health-related studies, life sciences, agriculture and forestry, and art. They receive five-year subsidies and are autonomous in deciding how to spend the money, e.g. on salaries or by establishing special doctoral grants. In July 2013, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education announced a competition for the next group to receive additional funding and KNOW status. The results of the competition will be announced in 2014.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The basis of equality for women and men in Poland is the principle of equality before the law, which is embedded in the Polish Constitution. The main institution for gender equality is the Department for Women, Family and Counteracting Discrimination in the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, which has operated since 1 January 2006.           

General legislative acts prohibit discrimination and protect women during their period of pregnancy and maternity leave. Recently, the government published a proposal to amend the Labour Code and the Act on financial benefits from social insurance in the case of sickness and maternity (2013). In 2013, it also introduced measures on flexitime, paid parental leave, child-care facilities and returning to work after bringing-up a child, as well as support and financial contributions to projects promoting equal opportunities for working men and women.    

Additionally, the 2014 National Reform Programme promises to reinforce measures such as maternity and parental leave and provision of child-care facilities, and fostering a work-life balance and career progression in order to raise the employability of women.

In the research field, Poland has specific legal and soft measures in place to promote gender equality. Poland belongs to the EU countries with traditionally high proportions of women involved in R&D activities. In 2011, 65.5 % of all university graduates were women, including 51.5 % of new doctorate graduates. Women make up 22.05 % of all the professors employed in Poland and out of 524 members of the Polish Academy of Sciences, in 2011 only 20 (3.81 %) were women.           

In January 2014, the Minister of Science and Higher Education issued a statement, confirming the importance of gender-related research and linking it to the Polish and EU legal framework. The Central Statistics Office (GUS) monitors gender balance at national level and many public sector R&D institutions publish corresponding data in their annual reports.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 61.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 19.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

In 2012, female researchers represented 42.1 % of the recruitments in the higher education sector and 20.3 % of academics in Grade A. This is slightly above the EU average (18.7 %).

The country has measures supporting a return to work after parental leave. In the science and higher education field, the recruitment, retention and career progression of female researchers is fostered by several measures: fixed-term contracts are extended by the periods of maternity leave and additional leave to raise children; doctoral studies are prolonged under the same conditions; the annual workloads of women giving birth and raising children are reduced. Article 28 of the 2010 Law on the principles of financing science stipulates that a grant or scholarship can be interrupted during a period of maternity or parental leave. Periods of maternity leave and leave for taking care of children are not included in the calculation of maximum age for grants for young researchers for the NCN and NCBiR's programme LIDER. The Foundation for Polish Science runs the ‘Parent-bridge programme’, which aims to enable researchers who are raising young children to return to advanced research work as well as to enable pregnant women to carry out research projects which are financed from external sources.     

In Poland there are awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to support specifically female researchers. Several soft measures are put in place to foster cultural and institutional change on gender. The Conference of Rectors of Polish Technical Universities manages a programme called 'Girls on technical universities', compiles lists of 'women-friendly' technical universities, thus establishing dedicated contact points for women. The MNiSW in cooperation with the magazine Elle offers financial awards 'Girls of the future' for outstanding female researchers. L’Oréal, with the support of UNESCO, offers scholarships for women-scientists.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Gender mainstreaming in the contexts of research projects is not actively promoted, but multiple research programmes include the topic alongside a long list of potential research areas in social studies, without earmarking funds specifically for this particular area. Dedicated gender studies are available at, among others, the University of Warsaw and the Polish Academy of Sciences.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Poland who responded to the survey did not provide information on support to the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, Article 48 of the Law on Higher Education stipulates that the minister for higher education makes sure that at least 30 % of the members of the Polish Accreditation Committee are women. The Law obliges the Committee to strive to ensure a gender balance in its work, among others that there should be a balanced representation of women on the Main Council of Science and Higher Education and the Central Committee for Scientific Degrees and Titles.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 10.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 16.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Poland is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the NCBiR model agreement makes open access mandatory. Additionally, several measures have been put in place by the MNiSW to guarantee open access for Polish researchers and students to a variety of research results: gold open access publications in Springer's journals; licence for the Virtual Library of Science; digitisation of scientific journals and their electronic distribution. In 2012, the MNiSW defined criteria and modalities for evaluation of Polish scientific journals: these journals get extra points if they publish contents of articles online.            

Additionally, patented inventions can be used for scientific, non-commercial research without the need to license the invention or pay royalties.      

The future POIR includes support to adjustments of ICT infrastructure, which is necessary to enable open access to scientific publications in Poland.

The NCBiR model agreement requires publications to be made available via open access – either green with deposition in repositories or gold, as the costs of publication covered by most R&D support programmes. The same model agreement also requires software to be free or open source.  

Index Copernicus offers basic access to data free of charge.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 73 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

No policy measures supporting open access to data have been identified.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 73 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 49.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 22.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

As regards repositories, the Federation of Digital Libraries, which is managed by the by Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC) archives, digitises the contents of Polish libraries, including scanned scientific publications. The Virtual Library of Science, established in 2010, aggregates commercial publication databases into a common platform. Additionally, the Centre of Open Science CeON (managed by the University of Warsaw) also maintains open access repositories, including books, and offers legal advice on open access.         

Additionally, an ongoing project called 'Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific and Scientific Technical Information (SYNAT)', funded by the NCBiR and developed by the University of Warsaw and Warsaw University of Technology, will establish an open repository of scientific publications and data for all researchers and institutions in Poland to use.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer between public and private sectors, Poland stresses the importance of knowledge transfer and cooperation between scientific institutions and industry and supports open innovations in the overall Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 (2013) and its implementing Enterprise Development Programme (PRP).   

Several legislative acts set relevant rules regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) for both universities and research institutes, and include the possibility or obligation to commercialise publicly funded research results, encourage the establishment and use of academic spin-offs, oblige universities to set up technology transfer entities and include performance in commercial knowledge transfer as part of the institutional assessments for R&D organisations. Additionally, the MNiSW and the Polish Enterprise Agency have published several guidelines related to knowledge transfer.          

The POIR and the 'Operational Programme "Innovative Economy' (POIG) include measures to stimulate the cooperation between business and scientific organisations, such as building of mixed consortia and internships/secondments from business to academia; centralising funds for enterprises in a single agency and changes in the application and evaluation procedure of grants.          

The 2014 National Reform Programme includes business-academia cooperation as one of its main priorities. There are several programmes in the field of applied research and development (BRIdge VC, BroTech, Innovation Creator, LIDER, PBS, BLUE GAS, GEKON, INNOMED, INNOLOT, CuBR), strategic programmes (STRATEGMED, BIOSTRATEG, Modern material technologies) and programmes supporting the process of commercialisation of the results of R&D activities for economic purposes (Graf-Tech, InnoTech, Spin-Tech, Start-Tech), which were already implemented or are prepared for implementation during the 2014–2020 period. Most of these programmes are financed under the NCBiR.

The MNiSW also manages programmes for training personnel in technology transfer offices (TTOs) and hiring technology brokers for public universities (for example through programmes such as TOP 500 Innovators and 'Brokers of Innovation'). It has also published several guidebooks on the topic.

Strategic partnerships between academia and industry are supported by the NCBiR through sectoral programmes such as INNOMED and INNOLOT (for the specific sectors of medicine and aviation) but there are also horizontal, bottom-up programmes to establish joint research agendas.

Within the framework of the European Semester cycle, the European Commission highlighted in the 2014 Country Specific Recommendation the need for Poland to strengthen the links between research, innovation and industrial policy.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 61.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 63.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 19.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 52.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Poland who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Poland has not set up a strategy for its implementation. However, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education proposed amendments to the Act on science financing which foresee the future integration of ICT systems. These would in turn support information sharing about institutions, research projects and researchers.        

Through the Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC), which is affiliated with the Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry at the Polish Academy of Sciences the country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible.           

The POIR intends to fund the development of ICT infrastructures that are needed for open access to scientific publications.

Concerning digital services, the country provides cloud services and premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Poland was a member of an identity federation in 2011 through the Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Centre (PSNC) The country is member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations. It operates PIONIER – the Polish Optical Internet network.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 31.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Poland, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 54 research performing organisations in Poland answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 22.2% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Poland shows that 35.2 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 59.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 5.6 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 69.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 27.7 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 2.4 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National Smart Specialisations || 2013 || X || X

The Strategy for the Innovation and Effectiveness of the Economy for the years 2012-2020 “Dynamic Poland” || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

National Research Program “Foundations for the science and technology policy and innovation policy of the state” || 2011 || ||

NCN, NCBiR, Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW), the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) and Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PARP) programmes || || ||

Peer-review in national programmes || 1991 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Regional Development concerning the award of financial support based on the Operating Programme Innovative Economy, 2007-2013, by the Polish Agency of Enterprise Development (PARP) || 2012 || X ||

Act on National Research & Development Centre (NCBiR) || 2010 || ||

Act on National Science Centre (NCN) || 2010 || ||

Act on principles of science financing (modified in 2010) || 2010 || ||

Ordinance of the Director of NCBiR concerning the principles of selection and compensation of experts at NCBiR Resolution of the NCN Counil concerning establishment and modalities of work of the panel of experts || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional assessment by the Committee for Evaluation of Scientific Research Institutions (KEJN) || || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the conditions and modes of applying for the status of KNOW (National Leading Scientific Institution) Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the call f || 2011 || ||

Act on higher education (including amendments from 2011) || 2011 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions of programme and institutional assessment || 2011 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

JPIs, EIROs, Artile 185, ERA-NETs - participation of Poland || || ||

Amendment to the Ordinance of the Minister of Economy amending the ordinance concerning financial support offered by the Polish Agency of Enterprise Development linked to operational programs || 2011 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the conditions and modes of awarding public support for financing international scientific cooperation || 2011 || ||

Resolution of the Council of NCN concerning priority areas for fundamental research The Strategic Research and Development Programs of NCBiR || 2012 || X ||

Polish participation in LIFE+ || 2008 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The Visegrad Fund || || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the criteria and mode of award and settlement of funds for financing international scientific co-operation || 2011 || ||

NCN's program "HARMONIA" || 2010 || ||

Bilateral agreements || || ||

Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the establishment of Program "Ideas Plus" || 2010 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Development of online system POL-ON || 2011 || ||

Polish Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (updated) || 2014 || X || X

Ordinances of the Minister of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) (2010-2011) || 2010 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Legal interpretations supporting use of publicly funded RIs || 2013 || X || X

Draft Operational Programme "Innovative Economy" (POIG) || 2007 || ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Operations of 10 EURAXESS Service Points in 10 different cities in Poland || 2011 || ||

Establishment of EURAXESS POLAND portal || 2009 || ||

Attractive careers

Draft Operational Programme "Human Capital " || || ||

Scientific Visa package || || ||

The Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the documentation of studies; Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions of programme assessment and institutional assessment (2011) || 2011 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning recognition of foreign scientific degrees, and titles in the area of arts || 2011 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning doctoral studies and doctoral scholarships || 2011 || ||

Endorsement of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers by Polish Academy of Sciences || 2008 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Code of a researcher’s ethics || 2012 || X ||

Polish Labour Code Act on the implementation of some regulations of the European Union concerning equal treatment (2010) Act on financial benefits from social insurance in the case of sickness and maternity (2013) || 2010 || ||

L`Oreal Polska Grants || || ||

The Act on scientific degrees and scientific title and titles in the area of arts (amendments from 2011) || 2011 || ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning conditions for work remuneration and award of other work-related benefits for employees of public higher education institutes || 2011 || ||

Awards "Girls of the future" || 2009 || ||

Programme "Girls on technical universities" || 2008 || ||

NCBiR Programme LIDER || 2010 || ||

Programme 'BRIDGE' || 2010 || ||

Polish-Norwegian Research Programme || || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Draft guidelines of the amendments to the Act on science financing (2012) || || ||

DRIVER initiative || || ||

Virtual Library of Science || 2010 || ||

Centre of Open Science CeON || 2012 || X ||

Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education establishing programme 'Index Plus' || 2011 || ||

Index Copernicus || 2006 || ||

SYNAT -        Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific and Scientific Technical Information || || ||

Act on Industrial Property Rights || 2000 || ||

Springer's open choice programme || 2010 || ||

Communication of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the establishment of National Programme for the Development of Humanities || 2010 || ||

Model agreement for applied research projects, funded by National Research & Development Centre (NCBiR) || 2011 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Amendment to the Act on higher education || 2013 || X || X

The NCBiR Programme “BRIdge Mentor” || 2013 || X || X

The NCBiR Innovation Creator Programme || 2008 || ||

The Ordinance of the Minister of Science and Higher Education concerning the criteria and modes of awarding scientific ranks to scientific organisations || 2012 || X ||

Draft Operational Programme 'Smart Growth' (POIR) || || ||

The GRAF-TECH Programme The BLUE – GAS POLISH SHALE Gas Programme || 2011 || ||

The  NCBiR Programme "BRIdge VC" || 2013 || X || X

 The NCBiR Programme "SPIN-TECH" || 2012 || X ||

Program 'Innovation Brokers' || 2013 || X || X

Program 'Top 500 Innovators Science - Management - Commercialisation' || 2011 || ||

Enterprises Development Programme || 2013 || X || X

INNOTECH programme IniTech programme || 2013 || X || X

The NCBiR Programmes: LIDER Programme; KadTech Programme; DEMONSTRATOR+ Programme || || ||

'Commercialisation of B+R for practitioners' (Komercjalizacja B+R dla praktyków) - KT guidelines by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education || 2010 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center (PSNC) || 1993 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

On the policy level, research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Prime Minister’s office, which is advised by the National Council for Science and Technology and the main ministries in charge of supporting research and development (RD): the Ministry for Education and Science and the Ministry for the Economy. The Ministry for Education and Science (MES) is responsible for designing and implementing research policies, for the development of international research cooperation activities and for producing R&D statistics. Other sectorial ministries also allocate funds to R&D, but their importance in R&D funding is not comparable.

On the operational level, Portugal has operational programmes financing the research system together with the major executive agencies, notably the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia or Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) that operates as a research council. The FCT is the public agency responsible for implementing the Portuguese Science and Technology government policy. Its mission consists of promoting the advancement of scientific and technological knowledge in Portugal, exploring opportunities that become available in any scientific or technological domain to attain the highest international standards in the creation of knowledge, and to stimulate their diffusion and contribution to improve education, health, environment, and the quality of life and wellbeing of the general public.

At the research performers' level, there are several agencies that perform R&D activities, namely the academic R&D units and the public laboratories. The majority of the scientific research in Portugal takes place in R&D institutions financed and evaluated regularly by the FCT. Currently there are 293 R&D units and 26 associate laboratories, where more than 22 000 researchers are given the opportunity to perform research, and who have  a central role in both advancing research and national development, while establishing their institutions as international centres of excellence to address issues of national and global relevance.

The country has not adopted a national strategy for research and innovation.

The FCT developed a diagnosis of the national research and innovation system in 2013, which has contributed to the development of the Portuguese National Strategy for Research and Innovation for Smart Specialisation, which articulates national and regional levels and will be launched soon.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Portugal represented EUR148 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant was EUR 151. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 2 % of total government expenditures and 0.9 % of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).

Since 2007, the business sector has become the most important actor in the R&D system, with a share of 47 % in the national gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) in 2012. In 2001, when R&D expenditure was still at 0.85 % of GDP, the public sector’s share in R&D funding was 61 % and the business sector’s share was only 32 %. Most funding from the business sector (98.2 %) was for its own use. Funds coming from abroad were dispersed through the different types of R&D performers.

The resources under the category 'abroad' included EUR 411 million from the EU Framework Programme but did not include EU Structural Funds for research, which are channelled through the government budget. European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds provided EUR 307 million in the 2007-2013 period. But if the broader domain of 'Research, innovation and entrepreneurship' is considered, which includes several other themes related to research activities together with the information society measures, support for specialised business services, technology transfer and advanced training, the amount of earmarked funds is EUR 5 189 million.

The FCT is the main research-funding agency (in charge of 31 % of the total R&D budget) and in 2013 the FCT invested EUR 423.8 million in science and research. The FCT provided the following funding: to research projects (with around 2 300 active projects and funding of about EUR 90 million p.a.); to career development with the aim of recruiting 1 000 outstanding researchers by 2016 (EUR 47 million p.a. provided through several programmes); to supporting around 10 000 PhD students, post-doctoral researchers and researchers at other stages in their career through scholarships, (EUR 160 million p.a.);  to funding 293 R&D units and 26 associate laboratories (EUR 56 million p.a.) where approximately 22 000 researchers work; to international cooperation agreements (EUR 44 million p.a.); to the online scientific library b-on, and the management and operation of the Science Technology and Society Network (EUR 13 million p.a.); to scientific meetings, publications, travel grants and to the public understanding of science (EUR 8 million p.a.). All these figures are averages for 2011-2013 and provided by the FCT.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based funding is allocated through the FCT.

The share of research funding allocated on a competitive basis has been on the rise in Portugal over recent years. However, delays in publishing calls for research projects and also the fact that the decisions on funding these projects have been delayed has led to a shrinking of the share of funding associated with project-based competitive funding.

The following are examples of measures where a competitive allocation of funding applies:

•           The 2010 Regulation of access to scientific research and technology development (RTD) funding sets the general conditions of access and allocation of funding to projects financed by the FCT;

•           The R&D projects, managed and implemented by the FCT since 2000, consist of competitive calls that are open to all disciplinary areas;

•           The R&D Units consist of incentives for business firms to create R&D units aiming at enhancing the productivity, competitiveness and integration into the global market;

•           The 2012 Incentive Programme aims at stimulating national research institutions to raise extra funding outside the scope of the FCT funding. Specifically, it awards an extra 30 % to competitive contracts of research institutions stemming from national or international funding or from business companies and it awards an extra 70 % in relation to contracts stemming from the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 79.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

According to the 1999 Decree on the Legal Statute on Scientific Research Institutions, regular independent evaluations are required. External evaluations made by independent panels of internationally recognised experts are promoted by the FCT and are held in accordance with this law.

The culture of international peer review is firmly established in the university system in Portugal. The main exception to this rule is the funding that supports the network of public laboratories, which is not usually linked to peer-review mechanisms. However, the research teams that work in these laboratories also submit proposals for funding for their research projects to the regular 'R&D projects – Projects of Scientific and Technological Development Research' calls, and with this component they are under the 'principles of international peer review'.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is increasingly allocated based on institutional assessments.

Until 2011, the research institutions were mainly financed through multiannual block funding and since then it has been increasingly based on performance.

The evaluation of research institutions is defined by law and the FCT organises regular assessments of national R&D institutions. These evaluations occur approximately every five years, and currently the national R&D institutions are being evaluated with the support of the European Science Foundation. The evaluation exercise is based on periodic assessments by an international panel of experts, based on the R&D institutions' reports and activity plans as well as direct contacts with researchers and onsite visits by the evaluation panel. After each assessment, all R&D institutions are awarded a qualitative grade, which determines the level of funding to be awarded until the next evaluation takes place, or until a mid-term review.The institutions ranked excellent or good are invited to participate in the calls for 'strategic projects'.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 8.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Transnational cooperation has been a key objective of Portugal’s Science and Technology (S&T) policy over the past 40 years. This is reflected, amongst others, in the large number of bilateral agreements that Portugal has signed with other EU countries and with several universities in the United States of America (USA).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 6.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Portugal allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Portugal dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Portuguese participation in the total participation is 2 % and the country received 1.2 % of the total European Commission's contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 43 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per inhabitant) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.6 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in three of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative disease research (Alzheimer), Water challenges for a changing world and Healthy and productive seas and oceans. Portugal has observer status in the initiatives Cultural heritage and global change: A new challenge for Europe and Urban Europe–Global challenges, local solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so-called Article 185 initiatives of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Portugal was involved in four programmes co-funded through FP6 and FP7. In Horizon 2020, these programmes continued into second phases and the country is already involved in all four of the existing initiatives: AAL2, EDCTP2, EMPIR and Eurostars2.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. Portugal has participated in a total of 59 ERA-Nets, of which 29 are currently still running. The country also has participated in five ERA-Net Plus actions – of which three are still running – in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Portugal has numerous bilateral and multilateral agreements. An example of a strategic bilateral initiative under this action is the International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory (INL). This initiative is the result of a joint collaboration between the Portuguese and Spanish Governments. Although INL has suffered from the budgetary difficulties faced by both countries, for which a number of solutions are being implemented to open INL up to wider transnational collaborations, it is an example of transnational cooperation in science and research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not yet developed a specific policy, although scientific and technological cooperation with China, India, North African countries and the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries, including Brazil, Angola, Mozambique and Cape Verde, has been a priority. It is also proceeding on cooperating with universities in the USA on programmes that are specifically targeted for advanced training and research. The general monitoring of the cooperation programmes’ implementation is based on quantitative indicators, such as the number of open calls, the number of funded projects or the amount of associated funding, but on what regards cooperation programmes with the US universities, independent evaluations have been conducted, namely by the Academy of Finland, after the end of their first editions, which has allowed for a revision and readjustment of the programmes' curricula, objectives and activity profiles.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Portugal allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, there seems to be no research and development budget originating from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards in bilateral or multilateral programs takes place in many programmes. National funding institutions apply international peer-review standards. The main countries with which Portugal has bilateral or multilateral initiatives/agreements/programmes which allow for mutual recognition of evaluations, are the following: Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Serbia, Slovenia and Spain.

The common funding principles proposed by the Commission for the implementation of joint programmes are almost fully applied (with the exception of intellectual property rights) by funding agencies in the country in several bilateral and multilateral joint calls. Their implementation is supported through contracts with the FCT where the objectives, evaluation criteria, budgets, payment terms and conditions, as well as the respective management rules (including operation of the Boards of Directors, management and annual external international review) are defined.

No information was found as to whether funding agencies implement 'Money follows cooperation', a scheme which allows small parts of a project funded by one of the participating research councils to be conducted in a different country. No information was found as to whether funding agencies implement 'Money follows researchers', a scheme which enables researchers moving to a research institution in a different country to transfer ongoing grant funding to the new institution and continue research activities according to the original terms and objectives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

Research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Portugal participates in the following large international research infrastructures: ESA, CERN, EFDA, EMBL, ESO and ESRF. In 2012, the country contributed 1 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 22 of them (44 %).

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures (RIs), Portugal is committed to funding two of them (ESSurvey, ECRIN) and has signed Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) of another eight (ELIXIR, INSTRUCT, EMSO, EPOS, EMBRC, LIFEWATCH, CLARIN, SKA).

With regard to its participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Portugal is involved in two of the six consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries. Portugal is a member of ESS ERIC and ECRIN-ERIC.

The FCT is developing the first National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures, aligned with the ESFRI Roadmap, taking into account the results of a national consultation that took place in 2013 with the aim of identifying RIs of strategic interest. The decision on the infrastructures selected is expected in the first quarter of 2014. On the basis of this decision, financial commitments to national, European and international RIs will be defined in the roadmap.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The completion of the design of the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures is expected to contribute to improved conditions for cross-border access to RIs.

In addition, there are several information services that facilitate cross-border access to Portuguese RIs, such as the MERIL database, which includes information on the European RIs and the specific webpages for each RI.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Portugal in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Portugal_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 50 061 FTE researchers in Portugal in 2011. This represents 9.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 3.4 in Portugal compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 46 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (MORE2 survey, 2012).

In Portugal, procedures for recruiting researchers are generally open and transparent. However, the existing legislative framework sometimes makes the system less effective than it might be. Portuguese institutions do not always publish job vacancies online and English is not always used.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The ‘Charter & Code’ has not yet been implemented in Portugal. The FCT, the Rectors’ Council and the Council of Associate Laboratories have established working groups to analyse the possible implementation of the ‘Charter & Code’.

By May 2014, 3 Portuguese organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 1 had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.        

The current R&D Units and Associate Laboratories Evaluation System was established in 1996 and there were only small changes up to its current version of 2007. The system evaluates the researcher working conditions offered by Portuguese Institutions. The evaluation procedure includes periodic assessments by international experts, as well as reports and activity plans. The evaluation exercise results in the award of a qualitative grade, which determines the volume of funding to be received by the institution up to the next evaluation.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.6 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The The Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) is implementing a major fellowship programme, including five year contracts for PhD holders and post-doc, and PhD grants in an effort to increase the number of students taking science to a doctoral level. Nevertheless, the Government of Portugal has not adopted any concrete measure to increase the number of female students taking science to an advanced (doctoral) level as the female percentage is already high.

All PhD programmes promoted by Portuguese Universities are accredited and evaluated by the National Evaluation and Assessment Agency (A3ES), which guarantees their quality. The Agency also has a mandate to provide the Portuguese State with expertise in matters of higher education quality assurance, participate in the European quality assurance system (EQAR), and coordinate assessment and accreditation activities in Portugal with international institutions.

The FCT has three evaluation criteria when selecting researchers to be funded: the merit of the candidate, the merit of the project and the quality conditions of the host Institution, including career provisions.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 3.2% in Portugal compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 12.0% in Portugal compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

The FCT has launched a number of key programmes aimed at attracting and retaining leading EU and third-country researchers to Portugal. Since 2011, in order for a non-national researcher to enrol for PhD training, a Portuguese residence permit has been a prerequisite. For post-doctorate candidates, there is no such restriction. The FCT has implemented the Marie Curie co-funded programme WELCOME II – Promoting the return of researchers to the European Research Area. This Programme promotes the mobility of researchers holding the nationalities of an EU Member State or an FP7-Associated Country to FP7, who has lived in any third country for at least the last three years, to join institutions located in Portugal. Third countries are neither Member-States nor Associated Countries with FP7.

Individuals may apply for a doctoral degree grant in a company in Portugal that satisfies the criteria set out in Article 30 §1 of Decree Law No 74/2006 of 24 March 2006 for the purpose of carrying out doctoral degree work in the business environment on subjects of interest to that enterprise, as long as this work is accepted by the university that confers the respective doctoral degree. FCT funds 50% of the fellowship and the company the remaining 50%. In 2012, some 100 fellowships were funded.

In order to qualify for this type of grant, a work plan must be submitted detailing the objectives, the support to be provided for the recipient’s research activity in the enterprise, and the expected interaction between the enterprise and the university where the recipient is enrolled in the doctoral degree programme. The form of articulation between the academic orientation for the doctoral programme provided by a university professor or researcher and the corresponding company supervision must be set forth in a protocol signed by both entities involved. These grants are, in principle, one year in length, renewable for up to a total of four years, and cannot be awarded for periods of fewer than three consecutive months.

The Government of Portugal has not put in place concrete measures encouraging researchers to move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa. This choice remains personal and is made on an individual basis.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Portugal has no specific gender provisions in the field of public research.

Gender equality is a fundamental constitutional right, enforced through different laws. Laws and acts foster gender equality mostly in public employment and education. The key instruments for promoting gender equality are the National Plans for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination. The 2014-2017 Plan was launched after a public consultation and aims at promoting gender equality in line with the European Pact for Equality among Men and Women. Notably, the new plan introduces the Gender Studies category in the FCT research financing lines, and a research project aimed at assessing women's participation in information and communication technologies (ICT) education courses.

The Commission for Citizenship and Gender Equality (GIC), the national mechanism for the promotion of gender equality, provides technical and financial support to the implementation of gender equality action plans in universities, focusing on the promotion of gender equality in organisational structures, management practices – selection/recruitment procedures, career development and rewarding mechanisms – and on family- work-life reconciliation. Two Portuguese universities have gender equality action plans.

The Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e Emprego (CITE) or Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment also promotes gender equality.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 36.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

The country has measures supporting a return to work after parental leave. The same position is guaranteed by law after maternity leave.

It has set up awards, fellowships and/or other similar mechanisms to support female researchers specifically. Portugal annually hosts the L’Oréal Portugal medals of Honour for Women in Science, intended to promote scientific research at the post-graduate level in Portuguese universities or other organisations of recognised merit in the field of health sciences and environmental sciences.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

The 2014-2017 National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination has introduced the Gender Studies category in the FCT research financing lines.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 64.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey did not indicate any support to the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making,  there are no initiatives or regulations promoting equal gender representation in academic and research committees, boards and governing bodies. Portugal has not set up gender quotas or any measures ensuring balanced composition of governing bodies of higher education institutions.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 41.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 5.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Portugal is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access (OA), there is a specific policy on open access to publications since May 2014.

Related to open access to publications, the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) adopted a policy on open access to publicationsin May 2014. According to the policy, peer-reviewed publications must be made available in one of the institutional OA repositories of the OA Scientific Repository of Portugal (RCAAP – Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal; more details below).

According to the 2009 report 'Open Access in Portugal – A State of the Art Report', which was commissioned by the RCAAP, most Portuguese universities have their own institutional repository and OA developments in Portugal  have been mainly achieved by institutional repositories and  self-archiving (Green OA), and to a lesser extent with open access publishing (Gold OA).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 33 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 23.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of publicly-funded scientific publications in OA amongst research-performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the FCT made a policy statement on open access to data  in May 2014, however it was more cautious than open access to publications. The FCT encourages researchers to make research data available in open access if and when they judge it possible and appropriate. The RCAAP, established in 2008, is the most significant initiative. Currently more than half a million documents are accessible in OA through RCAAP.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 33 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 78.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support open access to data is similar to the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing organisations making available online and free of charge publicly-funded scientific research data systematically is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Regarding repositories, there are four:

•           RCAAP (Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal or Portugal Open Access Science Repository), a recognised repository of publications and data;

•           The DeGóis Curricula Platform, an instrument for gathering, supplying and analysing the intellectual and scientific production of Portuguese researchers;

•           b-on or the Online Knowledge Library, which provides unlimited access to a large database of scientific publications for researchers. Portugal decided in 2013 to continue funding b-on. EUR 40.6 million will be paid to the publishers that supply the contents of the b-on over a three-year period (2013, 2014 and 2015);

•           OpenDoar Webpage, which stores the collections of 43 Portuguese repositories.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to Open Innovation (OI) and Knowledge Transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, Portugal has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.

However, there is a relevant initiative under preparation called GAIN (Global Innovation Acceleration Network) that aims at providing a national structure for technology transfer. GAIN results from a partnership between the Ministry of the Economy and the Ministry of Education and Science. In practical terms GAIN will be based on the collaboration between the FCT (Science and Technology Foundation), the ADI (Innovation Agency), the IAPMEI (Institute for Business Investment) and the four partnerships between Portugal and universities in the USA. Its objectives are the following: creation of spin-offs and commercialisation of technology and knowledge; creation of an international network of Portuguese incubators (Portuguese Global Innovation Hub); observation and monitoring of technology transfer activity.

Two relevant measures support the implementation of research training agreements with private sector organisations through the FCT:

•           PhD scholarships in industry (Bolsas de Doutoramento em Empresas, BDE): these provide grants to researchers who wish to develop research work in the business environment leading to a doctoral degree;

•           Mobility grants: grants to researchers to perform R&D activities in companies or other public or private entities, to participate in advanced training programmes involving business associations and scientific institutions or universities, or to carry out activities that promote technological innovation, namely in firms dedicated to risk capital management, technological intermediation, management of intellectual property and scientific consulting.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 71.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 70.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Portugal who responded to the survey and support national support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, Portugal has not set up a strategy for its implementation. The country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. This network is FCCN or NREN, the Portuguese National Research and Education Network, a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country.

Concerning digital services, the country provides premium services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 86.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Portugal was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The country is not member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.

However, Portugal has signed the policy to join eduGAIN through RCTSaai.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Portugal, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 62 research-performing organisations in Portugal answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 17.2 % of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011) and around one third of research-performing organisations.

The principal component and clustering analysis of research-performing organisations in Portugal shows that 40.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster, 39.0 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 20.3 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results vary significantly. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are as follows: 87.9 % for the ‘ERA-compliant’ cluster; 8.7 % for the ‘ERA-limited compliant’ cluster; and 3.5 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Seven regional authorities, which fund research, have not responded to the ERA survey.

Regarding the indicator ‘Share of funders supporting gender equality in research' it should be noted that it is lower than the EU average due to the existence of overarching laws supporting equality.

Regarding the indicator ‘Share of research-performing organisations which have adopted gender equality plans', it should be noted that gender equality in research applies in practice, with more than 45 % of researchers being women.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Diagnosis of the national research and innovation system by FCT || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Regulation of access to scientific RTD funding || 2010 || ||

Incentive Programme || 2012 || X ||

R&D projects - Projects of Scientic and Technological Development Research || || ||

SWOT analysis in order to identify areas of R&D competitive advantages || 2013 || X || X

Planned reform of the System of Fiscal Incentives to R&I in the Industry || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

R&D Units || 2007 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Creation of the International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory (INL) || 2005 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Design of the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures || 2013 || X || X

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Programme 'FCT Researcher' || 2013 || X || X

Statute of University Teaching Career || 1979 || ||

Attractive careers

Euraxess in Portugal || || ||

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

FCT PhD Programmes || 2012 || X ||

New typology and diversity of doctoral programs || 2012 || X ||

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

L’Oréal Portugal Medals of Honor for Women in Science || || ||

CITE (Comissão para a Igualdade no Trabalho e Emprego) or Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Fifth National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination (2014-2017) || 2014 || X || X

Parliament Resolution 46/2013 'No labor discrimination of women' || 2013 || X || X

Fourth National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-discrimination (2011-2013) || 2011 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) || 2008 || ||

DeGóis Curricula Platform || 2008 || ||

b-on - Online Knowledge Library  || 2005 || ||

Open Access (OA) policy to publications, by FCT || 2014 || X || X

Policy statement on Open Access and sharing of research data, by FCT || 2014 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Strategy for Intellectual Property in R&D projects || || ||

GAIN - Global Innovation Acceleration Network || 2013 || X || X

Programme of Applied Research and Technology Transfer to the Industry || 2012 || X ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN || || ||

|| || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of National Education (MNE), which formulates policies in cooperation with other sectoral ministries. The MNE also manages the national research and innovation strategy and coordinates the main implementation instruments, i.e. the National Research and Innovation Plan and the research and development (R&D) programme.

At the level of R&D funding and implementation, the Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI), which is under the authority of the MEN, plays a key role in implementing the research and innovation plan and allocating higher education funding. Other public funders include the Romanian Academy, which allocates the budget for its research institutes, and the Ministry of Economy and the Ministry of Agriculture, which manage sectoral research, development and innovation (RDI) plans. Public performers include coordinating organisations such as the Romanian Academy, the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences and the Academy of Technical Sciences, national R&D institutes, public research institutes, and universities.

Romania has developed the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020, which is currently under Government approval and which is aligned with the Europe 2020 Strategy, Innovation Union, Horizon 2020 and the European Research Area (ERA). The National Strategy highlights the need for research to be better translated research into innovation, R&D efforts to be better aligned with the Smart Specialisation Strategy and an improved quality of fundamental research. The National Strategy is implemented through the National Plan for Research, Development and Innovation (2014-2020) and the Operational Programme 'Competitiveness' – priority axis ‘Research, technological development and innovation for supporting business and competitiveness’. In parallel, Romania has also developed the National Competitiveness Strategy, which is to be approved during summer 2014. Moreover, Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme highlights the need to ensure Romania’s integration into the ERA.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Romania represented EUR14 per inhabitant in 2012, which represents less than 10 % of the EU28 average (EUR179). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant increased to EUR15. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 0.6 % of total government expenditures and 0.2 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in Romania has been higher than the growth rate of total EU GBAORD. The GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in Romania than the regression observed in the EU-28.

In order to achieve the R&D objectives, the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 includes annual plan for R&D public expenditure for the entire period 2014-2020. However, this planning may be jeopardised by the current fiscal and budgetary measures (Fiscal and Budgetary Strategy 2014-2016 and the Law of the National Budget 2014, No. 356/2013) which de facto significantly limit R&D spending. Moreover, EU structural funds for R&D allocated for the period 2014-2020 will most likely be comparable to the previous cycle, meaning that the R&D target is dependent on government resources. Tax credits for businesses (50 % additional tax deduction on R&D expenditure) to support the commercialisation of research results were introduced as part of the Government Ordinance 8/2013; however, the measure is not fully operational, as the implementing acts have yet to be finalised.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Project-based funding is allocated by the Executive Agency for Higher Education, Scientific Research, Development and Innovation Funding through the National Plan for Research, Development and Innovation as well as through the Operational Programme Competitiveness. As part of the National Plan, project-based funding is allocated to a variety of R&D projects and schemes with a structure which is similar to the EU FP7.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 97.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are systematically implemented within the framework of the National Plan for Research, Development and Innovation and the Research, Development and Innovation Operational Programme for EU structural funds. With regard to the National Plan for Research, Development and Innovation, all proposals need to be drafted in Romanian and English. Earlier legislation foresaw the use of foreign evaluators for the evaluation of R&D projects, programmes and institutions (at least 50 % foreign experts). However, this provision has been scrapped as part of the Government Ordinance 1241/2013.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is not allocated based on institutional assessment. The issue faced by the Romanian public research systems is the limited amount of institutional funding. The need to ensure stable institutional funding and a better link to institutional funding with institutional assessment has been acknowledged in the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020. Institutional funding is provided to the Romanian Academy -which receives a relatively constant amount that correlates with the number of researchers – and to national R&D institutes, through the Programme. With regard to universities, it should be noted that from 1994 onwards, Romanian universities have not received any institutional funding for their research activities. The only source of funding for their research activities is through project-based funding. The issue of a highly fragmented public research sector has been recognised in Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme and the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020, which calls for a restructuring and streamlining of public research institutes to allow for a concentration of funding. The reform of universities and public research organisations launched in 2011 aimed at restructuring the public research sector and introducing institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding. Between 2011 and 2013, 39 of the 46 national R&D institutes were assessed. However, this exercise has not led in practice to significant changes to the allocation of institutional funding for research-oriented universities nor to a reduction or streamlining of public research organisations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Romania who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures supporting institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 emphasises the need to better align R&D efforts with societal challenges.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Romania allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Romania dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Romanian participation in the total participation is 0.9 % and the country received 0.4 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR7 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4.4 % of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average 3 % of GERD for the same period).

The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s participation in Horizon 2020. Moreover, the elaboration of the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 is aligned with Horizon 2020.

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in six of the ten ongoing initiatives, coordinating none of them. These initiatives are Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change, Cultural Heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Water Challenges for a Changing world, and Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans.

The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 specifically foresees funding for JPIs and highlights the need to concentrate R&D resources on the four areas identified in the Smart Specialisation Strategy (bio-economy, information and communication technologies, space and security, energy and climate change and eco-nanotechnologies).

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 96 ERA-Nets, of which 36 are currently still running. The country also has participated in eight ERA-Net Plus actions of which four are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

The country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It includes science and technology cooperation across the region and by the end of 2013 six scientific clusters had been launched, for example a cluster in energy and sustainability research.

Romania participates in the development of ESA and CERN programmes as a full and candidate Member State, respectively. The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s strategy vis-à-vis existing and new initiatives and foresees related funding.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has set up approximately 17 bilateral research agreements. In particular, it has agreed on research programmes with Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, which provide for joint research projects and thematic research calls. The country also has agreements with the United States of America (USA), South Africa, China, Korea, Russia and Turkey. The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 outlines Romania’s approach to cooperation with third countries, notably through the funding of bilateral calls. The country does not monitor the implementation of cooperation programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Romania allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the organisations did not received funding originating from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer review standards is implemented in Romania routinely as part of its joint programmes or bilateral agreements. This is the case under the Swiss-Romanian cooperation programme and within the framework of Romania’s international agreements with Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey and Hungary. Moreover, the ERA-like grant scheme provides grants to researchers who have been successfully evaluated but not retained for funding by the European Research Council (ERC) competition.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Romania allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of eight of them (0,16 %). The country coordinates none of them.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures (RIs), Romania is committed to funding two of them: Extreme Light Infrastructure – Nuclear Physics (ELI-NP), and FAIR. Romania has allocated a large budget for the development of the ELI-NP, which is the largest research infrastructure to be built in Romania. With the ELI-NP infrastructure, Romania has been a pioneer in the use of EU structural funds for investing in a pan-European research infrastructure.

With regard to the participation in the ERIC, Romania participates in one (CERIC-ERIC) of the seven consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest which involve several European countries.

In terms of support to Research Infrastructures, Romania’s has been increasingly involved in the development and implementation of research infrastructures. The national roadmap for research infrastructures was produced in 2007 by the Romanian Committee for Research Infrastructures (CRIC). Moreover, the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 announces the development of a new national roadmap for research infrastructures, which should be in line with the Smart Specialisation Strategy. The updated roadmap will also include references to the participation of Romania in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI Roadmap.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 mentions the setting up of a National Research Infrastructure Registry, aiming at facilitating access to research infrastructures for public and private users. Romania facilitates researchers’ access to the ESFRI projects in which the country participates. Support to access is mainly provided through the Sectoral Operational Programme 'Increase of Economic Competitiveness (SOP-IEC) priority axis 2: Operation 2.2.1 - Development of the existing R&D infrastructure and creation of new infrastructures, laboratories and research centres.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Romania  in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Romania_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 16 080 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Romania in 2011. This represents 1.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 3.0 among the Innovation Union reference group (Modest Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 24.7 in Romania compared with 9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 51% of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The recruitment system is regulated by the Government Decision on general principles for recruitment in the public sector (HG No.286/2011), the Law on the Statute of R&D personnel (Law no. 319/2003) and the National Education Law (Law No.1/2011). National legislation does not impose online advertising of public research positions. It is mandatory that research vacancies are published in the Romanian Official Journal, newspapers and at the universities’ headquarters. Higher education institutions (HEIs) and R&D institutions have their own internal procedures on recruitment which are in accordance with these laws and are generally published on the institutions’ website.

A set of policies has been developed to make the system more open and transparent, such as the Scientific Visa and other admission conditions for foreign researchers.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

Romania actively promotes the implementation of the principles of the ‘Charter & Code’ through the information package for the recruitment of researcher (PN II). In the publicly financed R&D recruitment procedures, the ‘Charter & Code’ are not specifically mentioned. However, the main principles of this document are reflected in the main policy documents on recruitment.

By May 2014, four Romanian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which two had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

Education Law No. 1/5 January 2011 changed the old system of public university funding based on the number of students to a system based on an internal assessment and performance classification of all departments carried out every five years.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.7 in 2011 compared with 1.1 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The Romanian Law on Education (2010) has brought some changes that are designed to enhance the quality of doctoral training, such as: increases in performance-based funding for doctoral studies; dual statute of students as both doctoral students and research assistants or university assistant for a pre-determined period; the mobility of research grants; more flexibility in the internal organisation of the doctorate schools and enhanced autonomy for the university; a requirement that doctoral programmes be organised only on a full-time basis; a national code of doctoral studies of which the objective is to promote and implement procedures for enhancing the quality of the organisation and content of doctoral programmes, rights and obligations of doctoral students, doctorate coordinators and others.

Massive support for doctoral and post-doctoral schools was provided by the Sectoral Operational Programme 'Development of Human Resources', which targeted 12000 Doctors of Philosophy (PhDs) and 2000 post-doctorals in order to contribute towards the development of potential human resources for RDI. Unfortunately, for the moment, the access of these graduates to the R&D system is quite low, given the scarcity of projects and the restrictions on employment in the public sector. The total budget for this support was EUR325 million. In 2011, there were 88 projects which supported 9734 PhDs at a total cost of approximately EUR24133 per PhD.

Given the drastic reduction in funding for most research programmes, it can be estimated that recent infrastructures are underused, while the prospects of the new PhD graduates embarking on a research career are unclear. The long-term underfinancing has already been a determinant of a substantial brain drain, as Romania has one of the largest scientific amongst the European countries, with an estimated 15000 researchers.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 1.6 % in Romania compared with 1.7 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 2.1 % in Romania compared with 2.0 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

In Romania, the balance between inward and outward flows of researchers is severely tilted towards the outward flows, as Romania is one of the EU countries with the highest losses of qualified R&D personnel. This situation is caused by several factors, including the low market demand for researchers, low salaries in the science and technology (S&T)/RDI system, low political importance attached to the role of science, research and innovation for economic growth, in spite of the government rhetoric, insufficient/inadequate research infrastructure, insufficient funding of programmes meant to increase the attractiveness of S&T/R&D careers and, more recently, significant additional cuts brought about by the economic crisis, etc. The mobility of scientists and the attractiveness and consolidation of scientific careers is supported by several funding schemes under the Human Resources Programme of the 2007-2013 National RDI Plan, but most of them were discontinued after the sharp budget cuts of 2009 and have so far not been reactivated.

The Human Resources Programme of the 2007-2013 National RDI Plan has a few mobility schemes that allow PhD students to conduct innovation projects in firms, such as projects supporting the mobility of PhD candidates (which provides funding for three months in a public or private research lab) and post-doctoral research projects for the development of an independent career for young Romanian PhD researchers, especially by granting them access to top research infrastructure. In 2012, SOP-IEC priority axis 1 launched the first call for support to the development of 'poles of competitiveness' in Romania. The poles of competitiveness are described as an association, in a defined geographic area, among undertakings, research centres and educational institutions engaged in collaborative partnership (according to a joint development strategy) in order to generate synergies around a set of innovative projects aimed at one or more markets. Also, SOP-IEC priority axis 2 'Promoting innovation in enterprises' supports the secondment of highly qualified personnel from research organisations to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) for a maximum period of of three years.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Regarding general legislation on gender equality, Romania provides for one of the longest periods of childcare leave in Europe (Law 111/2010 amended by Governmental Ordinance 124/2011). However, there are no measures that address gender equality in research besides a government ordinance (Government Ordinance 111/2010), which supports career breaks for PhD candidates. This may be explained by the fact that women are well represented in the research sector.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 18.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any support to gender equality in public research.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Several scholarships have been granted to support female careers under the National Fellowship Programme 'UNESCO L’Oréal for Women in Science'. This programme is implemented in partnership with the National Commission for UNESCO, L’Oréal Romania, the Romanian Academy and the National Authority for Scientific Research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 29.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning gender dimension in research content/programmes, there are no measures reported.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 14.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any support to the inclusion of the gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, there are no measures reported.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 12.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 24.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 70 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Romania is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme and the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 support the gold open access standard access for publishing the results of publicly funded research. Moreover, the development of open access has been spearheaded by the stakeholder-driven initiative Kosson as part of OpenAIRE (see below). There is, however, no overall legislative or policy provision supporting open access to publications and data.

Related to open access to publications, a notable initiative at stakeholder level is the Kosson initiative promoted by the Transylvania University, Brașov and the Romanian Library Association. Kosson is a member of OpenAIRE and it supports the development of open access to scientific publications. Kosson has been active in launching a debate around good practices, methods, standards and policies for open access. The majority of publications is published through peer-reviewed scientific journals and afterwards may be published on open access communities such as http://www.acces-deschis.ro/en/ and http://www.kosson.ro

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Romania who responded to the survey did not declare any support to open access to publications. Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the Kosson initiative also supports the development of open access to scientific data.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 99.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 37.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

With respect to repositories, there is currently no overall legislative or policy measure. However, the Kosson initiative on open access supports the development of standards for the management and storage of data.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors, knowledge transfer has been acknowledged as a strategic policy objective in the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 and Romania’s 2014 National Reform Programme.

The National Strategy includes tax credits to foster public-private partnerships and ‘competence centres’ (i.e. public-private platforms). Several other measures have provided support to public-private cooperation. Knowledge transfer has been supported by ReNITT, which is a network for innovation and technological transfer and is made up of 12 technology transfer centres, 12 centres for technological information and 15 technological and business incubators. Four scientific and technological parks complement ReNITT. Although the activities of these entities remain relatively modest, efforts are deployed to enhance their institutional capacity (see below). The support measure to innovative start-ups and spin-offs, launched in 2008 with a total budget of EUR18.5 million, has provided funding for the creation of spin-offs that implement the recent results resulting from research projects and doctoral theses of researchers employed in public R&D institutes and academics from public universities. Moreover, various schemes (e.g. the National RDI Plan (2007-2013), SOP IEC and the information package and de minimis aid scheme for innovation vouchers) have financed partnerships between academia/research institutes and the private sector. Romania has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy.

Regarding support to technology transfer offices (TTOs), the National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 includes measures supporting the development of knowledge transfer skills and professionals (i.e. knowledge transfer training, intellectual property rights exchange platforms and secondment of personnel). The professionalisation and strengthening of the institutional capacity have also been supported by the 'Development of NASR’s public policy-making capacity in the field of innovation and technology transfer to ensure a sustainable socio-economic development’ project (2011-2013) which was co-funded by the European Social Fund through SOP ‘Development of the Administrative Capacity’, priority axis 1. With a total budget of approximately EUR3 million, this project aimed at creating a national network of innovation managers in the national and local administration.

The draft Strategy 2014-2020 and its related implementation instruments include measures supporting the development of incubators and transfer centres at regional level, as well as the temporary detachment of R&D personnel between the public and private sector.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 39.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 30.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Romania who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

As regards with the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. RoEduNet is the Romanian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. Moreover, an institutional data repository named ASPECKT for doctoral, postgraduate and undergraduate works was set up by the Transylvania University of Brasov. It is foreseen that this repository will be used for storing all the research activity carried out at the Transylvania University of Brasov.

Concerning digital services, the 2013 National Strategy for Romania’s Digital Agenda includes measures supporting the development of digital services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 13.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Romania was not a member of an identity federation in 2013. The county is not member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations. The National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 supports the adoption of measures on e-identity to facilitate researchers’ access to digital research services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Romania, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 47 research performing organisations in Romania answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 27.3% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Romania shows that 35.6 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 37.8 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 26.7 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 43.7 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 14.5 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 41.8 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

However, the results for funding organisations should be interpreted with caution since two relatively important organisations did not respond to the survey.

It should also be noted that several RPOs answered ‘not applicable’ to a majority of questions, whilst their mandate allows them to implement ERA and their profile is very similar to organisations in the ‘ERA compliant’ and ‘ERA limited compliance’ clusters (i.e. these are relatively large universities and research centres). As a result of this self-reporting issue, these organisations have been clustered in the group ‘ERA not applicable’. However, this does not fully reflect their 'normal' behaviour.  This is particularly visible in the section on knowledge transfer (see below).

For the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans’, the relatively low share at national level is explained by the fact that gender distribution in science is relatively even between women and men.

For the indicators ‘Share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities’ and ‘Share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities’, it can be noted that organisations in the ‘ERA not applicable cluster’ have a relatively high level of implementation. This is due to a self-reporting issue (i.e. organisations answering ‘not applicable’ in a majority of questions in the survey).

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Fiscal and Budgetary Strategy 2014-2016 || 2013 || X || X

Law of the National Budget 2014, no. 356/2013 || 2013 || X || X

Government Ordinance 8/2013 || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

National Plan for Research Development and Innovation (2007-2013) || 2007 || ||

Government Decision no. 133/2011 || 2007 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Education Law no. 1/5 January 2011 || 2011 || ||

Governmental Decision no. 789/2011, Methodology for classification of universities and ranking of programme studies, according to the provision of the Law on National Education no. 1/ 5 January 2011 || 2011 || ||

Governmental Decision no. 1062 /19 October 2011 regarding the methodology for the evaluation in view of classification of the units and organisations of the national R&D system || 2011 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Joint programmes and bilateral agreements || || ||

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

ERA-like projects || || ||

Joint programmes and bilateral agreements || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures || 2007 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Attractive careers

Euraxess Romania || || ||

Education Law no. 1/ 5 January 2011 || 2011 || ||

Sectoral Operational Programme "Development of Human Resources", Doctoral and post-doctoral schools || 2009 || ||

Measures supporting doctoral and post-doctoral schools of excellence || || ||

Governmental Decision 681/2011 regarding the Code for university doctoral studies || 2011 || ||

Government Ordinance 92/ 18.12.2012 regarding some measures in higher education and research || 2012 || X ||

Provision of the Law of National Education (Law 1/2011) regarding the post-doctoral research studies || 2011 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Law 111/2010 amended by Governmental Ordinance 124/2011 || 2010 || ||

Governmental Ordinance 111/2010 regarding the leave and monthly financial support for child raising || 2011 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Governmental Ordinance 8/23.01.2013 regarding the changes in the fiscal code || 2013 || X || X

ReNITT - network for innovation and technological transfer || || ||

Development of NASR’s public policymaking capacity in the field of innovation and technology transfer to ensure a sustainable socio-economic development’ project || 2011 || ||

Support to innovative start-ups and spin-offs project - total budget of €18.5m || 2008 || ||

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

Funding for research universities/institutes – enterprises partnerships through the National RDI Plan 2007-2013 & SOP Increase of Economic Competitiveness || || ||

ANCS Decision no. 9039/01 March 2012 and no. 9038/01 March 2012 (information package and minimis aid scheme for innovation vouchers) || || ||

National RDI Plan (2007-2013) and the SOP Increase of Economic Competitiveness: support to public-private partnerships || || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

National Strategy for Romania’s Digital Agenda || 2013 || X || X

Uptake of federated electronic identities

National Strategy for Research, Development and Innovation 2014-2020 || 2014 || X || X

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the overall responsibility of the Ministry of Education and Research and the Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communication. National government agencies carry out and monitor many of the policies. 

The main governmental agencies supporting research and development (R&D) is the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (Forte), and the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas). Among the other governmental research funding agencies can be noted the Swedish Energy Agency, various defence agencies, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Innovation and research of an applied nature is supported by the Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA).

The main performers of basic research, but also of applied and strategic research are the 15 universities, which receive over 90% of the governmental appropriations for R&D by direct funding and funding from research councils. The several regional university colleges and the very small (albeit growing) R&D institute sector complement the universities but account for a very small share of the public R&D appropriations (Hallonsten and Holmberg 2013). 

The public research funding system in Sweden is guided by quadrennial Research and Innovation Bills and the latest Research and Innovation Bill (2012/13:30) contains priorities for the period 2013 – 2016.

The 2012 National Innovation Strategy issued by the Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communication shares the analysis of the 2008 and 2012 Research and Innovation bills that Sweden needs to strengthen and improve the quality of the national R&D in order to keep a competitive position in the globalised knowledge economy. The innovation strategy is, however, mainly a framework vision statement and hence does not launch any concrete policies.

The 2012 Research and Innovation Bill stresses the necessity to link regional growth initiatives with national research and innovation policy. In May 2013 the government assigned the task of developing regional development programmes for 2014-2020 to regional and national authorities, including research and innovation strategies.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Sweden represented EUR 378 per inhabitant in 2012, more than twice the EU28 average (EUR 179). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.7% of total government expenditures and 0.9% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Eurostat).

Additional funds are available from 2014, which are equivalent equivalent to an increase in appropriations of 3% (National Reform Programme - NRP 2014).

The analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in Sweden has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. The GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Sweden even when it regressed at the EU28 level.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The share of competitive funding for public R&D in Sweden has increased significantly and overtaken, not in real terms but relatively, a large share of university research that was previously funded by institutional block grants issued directly to the universities. The variations in the ratio between competitive and institutional funds are due to the various funding increases launched in the two recent research and innovation bills (2008 and 2012). In particular, the rather substantial increase in the share of institutional grants between the years 2009 and 2010 is due to the effectuation of the major increase of the institutional block grants issued in the 2008 research bill. The large increase of institutional grants has been matched by a similar increase of private funding which has kept the share of competitive funding larger than the institutional.

A corresponding increase in the project-based funding (also resulting from the 2008 research bill) of almost 20 % between 2008 and 2009 makes the long-term development of the ratio between institutional block grants and competitive funding largely unchanged in the past five year period (with a slight relative overall increase of the share of competitive funding from 50.9 % in 2007 to 52.5 % in 2011).

According to the Swedish NRP 2014, in 2013, 33% of central government funds was distributed through project-based funding.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 81.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The peer review based assessment is the general rule within the Swedish Research Councils and VINNOVA, and the typical procedure is to have applications within general calls assessed by the scientific assessment boards that are either elected from the academic sector (research councils) or appointed by the director-general (VINNOVA).

However, the allocation of competitive public R&D funding in Sweden (mainly executed within the framework of the research councils) typically follows the procedure of internal peer review assessment boards with predominantly Swedish or Scandinavian members, with the exception of the ‘excellence’ funding programmes, i.e. the 2006 and 2008 Linnaeus Grants and the 2009 Strategic Research Areas grants (allocating in total EUR 30 million and EUR 300 million, respectively). These funding programs involved the use of international peer reviewers in the process of choosing grant recipients.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

The Research and Innovation Bill 2012 strengthened the institutional funding allocation on the basis of performance evaluation. In two steps, via the 2008 and 2012 Research Bills, parts of the institutional funding allocation to higher education institutions (HEIs) have been made competitive (performance-based); the 2008 bill earmarked 10% of all HEIs research block grant funding to a (primarily bibliometric-orientated) performance-based allocation scheme, and the 2012 bill increased the amount to 20% as of 2014.

According to the Swedish NRP 2014, in 2013, institutional funding represented 50% of the central government funds.

The Research and Innovation Bill 2012 defines that the distribution of funding between HEIs as being determined by quality, measured by two criteria: publications/references to publications and external research funds.

The 2012 Research and Innovation Bill described a move from bibliometric assessment to international peer review evaluation as the basis for reallocation of institutional funding. The Swedish Research Council has been charged with designing the system in all its specifics so that it can be implemented in 2018, at the earliest.

Sweden has developed a quality assurance system for evaluating research at universities that is aimed to result in an increasing quality of research. At the same time, however, traditional indicators are used, which might limit the growth of new research and the interaction with society (Joint Research Centre, JRC 2013).

In 2013 VINNOVA was tasked, in consultation with other central government research financiers, with designing methods and criteria for assessing the quality of higher education institutions’ cooperation with the surrounding community (NRP 2014).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 15.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Swedish governmental R&I policy is strongly based on the analysis that the competitiveness of the Swedish national economy and society hinges upon a strengthening of the Swedish national research and innovation system. Swedish research policy measures are designed by partly taking into account the policies of other European countries. The 24 Strategic Research Areas, identified in the 2008 Research bill and endowed with a specific funding programme allocating a total of EUR 300 million to 43 research environments in Swedish universities have been identified as also being highly relevant in the broader European perspective. Furthermore, VINNOVA began in 2011 launching calls aimed at solutions to grand challenges. The role of the Swedish research and innovation system in strengthening the long-term common European competitiveness is further strengthened in the latest Research and Innovation bill with a new coordination function for European partnership programmes. This function involves all Swedish research funding agencies. An additional SEK 200 million funding per year has been allocated to this function to meet the increased number of European partnership programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 3.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Sweden allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Sweden dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is higher than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and third countries is fostered by the Framework Programme (FP). In the Seventh Framework Programme, the share of Swedish participation in the total participation is 3.9% and the country received 4.3% of the total European Commission contribution. FP funding represents EUR 164 per inhabitant (EU average EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 2.7% of the Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (EU average 3% of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all ten of the on-going initiatives, coordinating one of them - Antimicrobial resistance - an emerging threat to human health.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in the four existing initiatives.

ERA-NETs facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 81 ERA-NETs, of which 19 are currently still running. The country has also participated in nine ERA-NET Plus actions - of which 7 are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Sweden is actively cooperating with other Nordic countries in joint programmes and institutions within the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordic cooperation involves Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as well as the three autonomous areas, the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands. The organisation of Nordic collaboration in research and innovation rests on two main pillars, one for research, NordForsk, and one for innovation, Nordic Innovation (formerly The Nordic Innovation Centre, NICE). In 2008 the Nordic Prime Ministers initiated the Top-level Research Initiative (TRI) and it is to date the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative that has a research focus within climate, environment and energy.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the Swedish government adopted a Strategy for international cooperation in research and research based innovation in 2012 and it has framework agreements in the field of research with eight countries. International cooperation is however primarily implemented by the national agencies, the public research foundations and the universities themselves which have their own bilateral and multilateral agreements. Consequently, there are hundreds of cooperation agreements (JRC 2013).

The Swedish Research Council has several mobility grants, e.g. International postdoc, and the International Career Grant. In the last Research Bill a new grant was introduced, Grants for Recruitment of Leading Researchers. The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working life and Welfare (Forte) offers Forte Fellowships and Visiting Researchers. Further, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) has a number of specific mobility grants aimed for mobility to both European and non-European countries. Mobility grants for exchange with Japan exist in a number of different forms and programmes organised by the SSF and VINNOVA. Examples of existing programmes include the Sweden-Korea Research Cooperation funded by the Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Sweden allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Swedish Research Council (VR) participates in the European Science Foundation (ESF) peer review forum and ensures that all public bodies responsible for allocating research funds apply the core principles of international peer review (ESF Peer Review Guide). Sweden also participates in the ESF through 13 member organisations that are all public research funding bodies or academic societies and which represents 31% of the total number of research funding institutions. The Swedish Research Council cooperates with various international programmes, e.g 10 Nordforsk programmes, allowing for mutual recognition of evaluations (Nordforsk 2013).

The 2012 Research Bill highlights the need for the international dimension of research policy to be strengthened.  With a trend towards encouraging international collaborations, opening funding programmes to external collaborators and funding international actors may become a viable option.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 89.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 8.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Sweden allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Sweden participates in the following large international research infrastructures: European Space Agency (ESA), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), European Southern Observatory (ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), European x-ray free electron laser (European XFEL) and Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL). The country contributes 1 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the EMBL, the ESO, the ESRF, the ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation to the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 29 of them (59%) and coordinates 2 of them:  EISCAT_3D and ESSneutrons.

In terms of financial commitments to the development of these Research Infrastructures, Sweden is committed to fund 16 of them, namely: CESSDA, ESSurvey, EISCAT_3D,  IAGOS, ICOS, LIFEWATCH, BBMRI, ELIXIR, EMBRC,ESRF UPGRADE, ESSneutrons, XFEL, ILL 20/20, FAIR and PRACE (ex HPC). So far, Sweden has dedicated SEK 2988 M (EUR 326.7 M) to the conception and/or construction phases of research infrastructures included in the ESFRI roadmap.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Sweden is involved in two of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries, namely ESS SURVEY ERIC and BBMRI ERIC.

The Swedish national policy for research infrastructures and the commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI infrastructures has resulted in significant investments in research infrastructures in general. 

In 2007, the Swedish government publicly announced its candidature to host the European Spallation Source (ESS) and build it in Lund, Sweden. Simultaneously, a grassroots movement had promoted the next-generation synchrotron radiation facility MAX IV in Lund. The ESS plans for commencing construction are moving on with binding funding pledges from several countries. Those by Sweden, Denmark and Norway, cover 50% of the construction costs. MAX IV is currently being constructed in Lund and set for opening in 2016. On 16 December 2013, the Swedish Research Council decided to allocate a total of just over EUR 150 million for the operation of the MAX IV facility for the years 2013-2018.

The national roadmap for research infrastructures was published in December 2011 and includes specific references to the participation of Sweden in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Among the research infrastructures coordinated by Sweden, the European Commission has funded access to ten of them.

Regarding cross-border access to research infrastructures, assessing access to large research infrastructures in Sweden is dependent on the decisions to be made with regard to the organisation and legal status of MAX IV, the ESS and the SciLifeLab. In the case of the ESS, effective access will be granted based on peer-review evaluation with scientific excellence and feasibility as main criteria according to policies to be decided by the future ESS organisation. The legal framework of ESS is planned to be a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC).

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Sweden in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Sweden Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

Stock of researchers

There were 48,589 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in Sweden in 2011. This represents 9.7 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 11.4 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation leaders) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 160.4 in Sweden compared with 47.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 64 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Since 1994, the Employment Ordinance requires HEIs to announce all job vacancies (both permanent or for a fixed period) for academic staff - including teachers and researchers - and to advertise all relevant information e.g. on the EURAXESS portal. To ensure that the information on the EURAXESS Sweden portal is adequate, VINNOVA has been appointed to administer the portal in cooperation with the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Research Council Formas and the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Association of Swedish Higher Education (SUHF), representing the Swedish Rector’s conference and thereby Swedish universities, signed the ‘Charter & Code’ in 2007.

By May 2014, four Swedish organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers and none of which had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

Higher education institutions and national funders are responsible for taking measures on researchers’ career development. Some institutions offer the possibility of a tenure track.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.9 in 2011 compared with 2.7 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In 2013, 61% of the doctoral students had employment contracts giving the same social benefits as other employees at the higher education institution concerned. Some universities already provide employment for all doctoral students and state funding may not be used for stipends. A research student doctoral grant is supposed to be converted to an employment relationship for a doctoral student in the last three years before their dissertation. Since 2001, the Swedish Higher Education Authority has been responsible for the quality of the higher education system. Its duties include evaluations of the study programmes and their subject areas. Some Swedish universities offer research communication skills, intellectual property rights (IPR)-awareness, career management and entrepreneurship training in their effort to improve researchers’ employment skills and competencies.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 10.9% in Sweden compared with 9.1% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 21.9% in Sweden compared with 14.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

Since 2006, European Economic Area (EEA) citizens have not needed a work permit to reside in Sweden. The Swedish government transposed the Scientific Visa Directive in 2008. HEIs may decide to allocate funding or other resources to retain or recruit outstanding researchers. The largest government research funding agency, the Swedish Research Council (SRC) funds a return phase for researchers who have spent 50% of their study time abroad. The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) has a number of specific mobility grants targeting both European and non-European countries. The Swedish Research Council also funds outgoing post-doctorates in all scientific areas.

The Swedish government has not put in place measures to encourage researchers to move from the public to the business sector and vice-versa. The researcher flow in Sweden is almost in one direction, namely towards industry. However, the Swedish Higher Education Ordinance provides for a position of ‘adjunct professor’ of up to six years part-time (20-50%). The adjunct professor should be an expert from the industry to be given the opportunity to work within a university for a certain period of time.

The VINN Excellence Centres (2004-15) are developed by the Swedish Competence Centres Programme (Centres of Excellence in Research and Innovation) and aim to strengthen the crucial link between academic research groups and industrial R&D in the Swedish National Innovation System.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

In spite of the general strong showing of Swedish in the international rankings and evaluations of gender equality and equal opportunities policy, recent general policy initiatives at national level have had little involvement with policies aimed at providing equal opportunities in academia. The 2012 Research Bill mentions gender inequality once, and instructs the universities and higher education institutions to work harder to break the gender bias in education. It also announced a budget of 32 million SEK per year, to be allocated to VINNOVA, for practical equality research during 2013-2014.

In 2013, the Swedish Research Council was tasked to develop a plan for how the council should contribute to gender equality. The plan is expected to be implemented in 2014 (NRP 2014).

To encourage a rise in the proportion of women among professors the Government has set targets for the recruitment of women professors at 34 HEIs for the period 2012–2015. These targets are based on the calculated recruitment base (senior lecturers and post-doctoral research fellows) in different fields of research. There have been targets of this kind since 1997, although none were set for 2009–2011.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 79.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 95.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 3.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations which have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Regarding recruitment, retention and career progression of female researchers, it can be noted that there are hardly any legislative barriers to gender equality in the public Swedish R&D system. The Swedish government largely leaves it up to the institutions themselves to achieve a gender balance in the academic sector.

The VINNOVA Vinnmer programme was intended for the underrepresented gender in the scientific field of application and for those researchers who have a PhD and who have completed their Post Doc qualification. The programme ended in 2014 and is now replaced by the more general Mobility for Growth programme.

General Swedish law guarantees that employers have to restore employees to the same positions after maternity or paternity leave. It is usually possible to extend a fixed-term contract due to maternity or paternity leave.

The Swedish Research Council assumes that research conducted with funding from the Swedish Research Council adheres to good research practice. In the evaluation of the applications and prior to decisions about grants, the following general guidelines are applicable to ensure gender equality. The Swedish Research Council’s gender equality strategy prescribes the same success rate for grants and the same average size of the grants to apply to women and men with regard to the nature of the research and the form of grant. Prior to an evaluation panel determining its proposal for the allocation of the grants, the success rate for the grants in the proposal shall be calculated for women and for men. Gender equality should be used as a special condition for the prioritisation of applications equivalent in terms of quality (or close to equivalent). In these cases, applications from the underrepresented gender are to be given higher priority.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 76.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Sweden has set up provision to integrate the gender dimension in research programmes and/or projects. The country has a dedicated budget for programmes funding women/gender studies.

VINNOVA aims to promote gender equality in appraisal of funding and within the organisation, and gender mainstreaming within research.

Statskontoret has been given the task to map and analyse the distribution of funds for research and doctoreal training from a gender perspective. The mission includes a study of the distribution process, among other the assesments upon which the distribution is made. the report is due on 31 Decemner 2014.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 34.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 51.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision making, the Researchers Report 2013 mentions that in Sweden, quotas/national targets are not mandatory. However, there is an expectation that the number of members on boards, committees, panels etc. be as gender-balanced as possible.

In relation to the goal of having at least 40 % of the under- represented sex in committees, the Government gave a general instruction (Regulation) to the Swedish Research Council to establish and sustain equal gender representation on discipline-councils and peer review assessment boards and committees involved in the recruitment of academic staff. The panels assessing grant applications at the Swedish Research Council are expected to have a balanced composition with respect to gender; the Government's instruction to the Council is that the Council shall 'promote gender equality within its area of work'. The Council has, on the basis of this instruction, adopted its own gender equality strategy.

The share of the under-representing sex participate in committees involved in recruitment/career progression and in establishing and evaluating research programmes in Sweden is 49%  (She Figures 2012).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 6.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 73.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research performing organisations is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Sweden is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of governmental policy, the 2012 Research and Innovation bill took one step towards institutionalising the open access principle in the Swedish public R&D system, by giving the Swedish Research Council and the National Library of Sweden the task of developing a national policy for open access to scientific information - research data and publications. This work is currently carried out in cooperation with research funding bodies, universities and higher education institutions. The work is not yet concluded and there has been no date specified for the delivery of these results.

Generally, the Swedish public R&D system is largely orientated to the international system of results circulation in peer review-based English-speaking journals owned and run by multinational publishing houses. Although there is a clear growth in the number of online, open access, journals among the ones preferred by the scientific community, open access publishing still, in most cases, requires the author to pay a fee for the review and publication in order to make the article freely available. Swedish universities spend large and growing sums of money on institutional subscriptions to the non-open journals, and this is considered a potential structural problem since the subscription costs only seem to increase for every year. The government has, consequently, adopted a strongly articulated policy that favours open access publishing and comprehensive efforts in the system to facilitate a relatively large increase in open access publishing in the Swedish universities.

Since 2010, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas), the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (Forte), the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation (RJ), the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW) has demanded that their grantees publish their results with open access. Almost all Swedish universities and higher education institutions have open, searchable databases where publications are listed and in many cases online versions of publications are openly accessible.

Related to open access to publications, two national initiatives to facilitate better access to scientific publications by indexing publications nationwide and promoting open access publishing are worthwhile mentioning. None of them are the result of direct governmental policymaking but they are more of a collaborative effort between public and private national organisations (agencies and foundations). First, the SwePub database, run by the National Library of Sweden makes it possible to search among articles, conference papers and doctoral dissertations published by researchers at Swedish universities and higher education institutions (all institutions except the Stockholm School of Economics are part of SwePub). The Swedish government gave an instruction to the National Library of Sweden to further develop the SwePub database in order to use for quality assured bibliometric analyses.

Second, the OpenAccess.se project is run and funded by the National Library of Sweden in collaboration with the Association of Swedish Higher Education (an voluntary interest organisation for Swedish universities and higher education institutions), The Swedish Research Council, The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences and the Knowledge Foundation (a public research foundation). Within this project, the collaborators work with information and counselling, infrastructure and services, and policy development regarding open access publishing.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 22.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 21.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support Open Access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support Open Access to data is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations making available on-line and free of charge publicly funded scientific research data systematically is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

The initiatives on EU level to build up research infrastructures for the facilitating of dissemination of data and results (e.g. European Social Survey, CESSDA, SHARE) are supported by the Swedish government who take active part as members in these initiatives.

The Swedish Research Council has evaluated Swedish researchers’ need for e-infrastructures, such as large-scale computing resources for calculation and storage. The evaluation will be followed-up in 2014 (NRP 2014).

In Sweden there is an indication for 56 OpenAire data repositories and 44 in OpenDoar data repositories. Both the proportion of gold and green open access will be reported as well as the overall percentage of open access publications, both nationally as well as university (OpenAire).

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, Sweden has not developed a knowledge transfer strategy. However, in 2012 the Government adopted an Innovation Strategy aimed at strengthening the innovative climate. The Innovation Strategy takes a holistic view with the purpose of enhancing innovative capacity and meeting social challenges. The strategy emphasises, for example, the importance of all relevant actors being involved, the lowering of thresholds and the creation of incentives to advance different actors' capacity for growth and innovation. The innovation strategy includes several different areas of policy and affects a number of government bills over the period up until 2020.

The 2012 research and innovation bill also presented several measures of importance for increased commercialisation and utilisation of research results, including funding and relevant instructions to governmental agencies. The research policy target was broadened so that research can contribute to the development of society and industry's competitiveness, resulting in an overarching focus on utilisation. The measures include for example a new instrument focussing on societal challenges and further strengthening of industrial research institutes, as well as new innovation offices at universities. It also includes measures and initiatives to strengthen the universities and colleges' assignment to work together with society and benefit from the research results, with the aim of bringing the lessons learned from this into the future performance based resource allocation system for 2018, which the Science Council is tasked to propose.

Funding organisations have specific funding lines dedicated to the implementation of knowledge transfer. In 2013 VINNOVA was tasked, in consultation with other research funders, with designing methods and criteria for assessing the quality of HEIs’ cooperation with the surrounding community. From 2015 on funds will be allocated to HEIs on the basis of cooperation indicators and an expert assessment of quality in cooperation. (NRP2014)

A related task, assigned in 2013, is that VINNOVA, in consultation with the Swedish Research Council, is to support the HEIs’ development of strategies for cooperation with the external community, and to work to ensure that research-based knowledge is utilised (NRP2014).

Also, innovation offices within all universities in Sweden have a special assignment to work with knowledge transfer at universities and very early stage commercialisation.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 55.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 15 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Sweden who responded to the survey and support national support to KT and OI, technology transfer offices (TTOs) and Private Public interaction  is lower than the EU average, which may be due to the higher share of basic research funded nationally.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in Full Time Equivalents) is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Sweden has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible - SUNET. SUNET's aim is to provide Swedish universities and colleges and other organisations within the research and higher education area with access to well-developed and effective national and international data communication and related services that meet their needs, whatever their geographical location. NUNOC (Nordic University Operations Centre) is the 24/7 operations organisation established by NORDUnet to operate and support SUNET's network and services.

Sweden is part of NORDUnet (www.nordu.net) which is a joint collaboration by the five Nordic National Research and Education Net-works in Denmark (Forskningsnettet), Finland (Funet), Iceland (RHnet), Norway (Uninett) and Sweden (SUNET) and operates a world-class Nordic and International network and e-infrastructure service for the Nordic research and educational community. It is a member of GÉANT, which is the pan-European research and education network that interconnects Europe’s National Research and Education Networks (NRENs).

With regard to digital services, Sweden provides federated services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 95.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Sweden was a member of an identity federation in 2011.  Sweden is member of eduGAIN through the Swedish Academic Identity - SWAMID, operated via SUNET.  eduGAINis a service that is intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information which is  related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) Partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Sweden, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 26 research performing organisations in Sweden answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 32.8% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Sweden shows that 41.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 33.3 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 25.0 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 95.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 4.0 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 0.2 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

For the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities’ and ‘Share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities’, it can be noted that organisations in the ‘ERA not applicable cluster’ have a relatively high level of implementation.

For the indicator ‘Share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers’, the figure may be an underestimation. According to official sources, approximately 50 % of all universities/university colleges in Sweden can provide researchers with federated electronic identity.

For the section on open innovation and knowledge transfer, it should be considered that the major technology engineering organisations did not respond to the ERA survey.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Funding scheme aimed at most prominent researchers in Sweden || 2013 || X || X

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Universities autonomy reform || 2010 || ||

2008 Research Bill || 2008 || ||

Government Bill 2012/Research and innovation || 2012 || X ||

Government Bill 2012/Research and innovation || 2012 || X ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Strategic Research Areas || 2008 || ||

Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

Strategy for international cooperation in research and research-based innovation || 2012 || X ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Excellence’ funding programs: 2006 and 2008 Linnaeus Grants and the 2009 Strategic Research Areas grants || 2006 || ||

Nordic Cooperation / Nordforsk / Top-level Research Initiative || 2008 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

National research infrastructure roadmap || 2011 || ||

Financial commitments to European Spallation Source (ESS), MAX IV || 2009 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Access to MAX IV, ESS and SciFiLab || || ||

Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

Euraxess web portal || 2011 || ||

Attractive careers

Incentivize HEI to make international recruitment of prominent researchers || 2013 || X || X

Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Measures to improve competitiveness of doctoral studies || 2013 || X || X

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Law on gender balance and government instruction to the Swedish Research Council || 2010 || ||

Delegation for Gender Equality in the Higher Education Sector || 2010 || ||

Grant for practical equality research during 2013-2014 to Vinnova || 2013 || X || X

Vinnmer programme, replaced in 2014 ny Mobility and Growth programme || 2013 || X || X

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Government Bill 2012/Research and Innovation (research data) || 2012 || X ||

Government bill 2012:13:30 Research and Innovation (Scientific publications) || 2012 || X ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Government bill 2012/Research and Innovation || 2012 || X ||

Innovation strategy || 2012 || X ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

SwePub database, OpenAccess.org || 2010 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economic Development and Technology (MEDT) for technology policy, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (MESS) is in charge of the education and science sectors as well as sports, with two Directorates: one in charge of higher education and the other in charge of science. The National Assembly is the top legislative body, and its two committees (Committee for Education, Science, Culture, Sport and Youth, and Committee for Economy) are in charge of discussing the legal and policy documents related to research and development (R&D) policy. Once cleared by the committees, the main legal documents (the Law on Research and Development, the National Research and Development Programme) are passed on to the Assembly for approval. Research support is provided mainly by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) and by SPIRIT, the Public Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for the Promotion of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Development, Investment and Tourism, which was established in 2012.

Slovenia currently supports sectors, strategies and products by funding of eight centres of excellence, seven competence centres and 17 development centres, which are all co-funded by structural funds. Annual calls by the Research Agency and SPIRIT are not limited to any priority field.

In 2010, the country adopted the Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia (RISS) 2011-2020, which covers virtually all activities in the field of R&D. It fosters the horizontal coordination of research and innovation (R&I) policies and a shift towards a target-oriented budget, aiming at a higher quality of life for all, using a critical reflection of society, an efficiency in addressing societal challenges and an increased added value per employee, while providing more and better jobs. The National Higher Education Master Plan (NHEMP) 2011-2020 was also adopted in 2010 and addresses a number of issues related with tertiary education. However, these strategies have only been partly implemented.

The Smart Specialisation Strategy for the period 2014-2020 period is being prepared.

In june 2014, the Council recommended that Slovakia streamlines priorities and ensure consistency between the 2011 Research and Innovation and the 2013 Industrial Policy Strategies with the upcoming strategies on Smart Specialisation and Transport, and ensures their prompt implementation and assessment of effectiveness.

In terms of R&I funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Slovenia represented EUR 92 per inhabitant in 2012 (EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant was the same (EUR 92). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government expenditures and 0.5 % of gross domestic product (GDP)(Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows some differences. In nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in Slovenia has been higher than the growth rate of of the total EU GBAORD. The GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed in Slovenia but less than the evolution observed in the EU-28.

A new law has entered into force to strongly promote R&I investment in the form of tax incentives (100 % tax incentives to stimulate further business investments in R&D).

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

With regard to project-based funding, there are no official figures for Slovenia in 2012 and 2013. The Ministry of Education, Science and Sport allocates structural funds for R&D, based on competitive calls for projects. In addition, it allocates national funds to finance participation and construction of ESFRI projects and some other large Ris. This part is allocated non-competitively. Project-based funding includes researchers’ salaries (up to 50 %).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 24.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is lower than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are applied in Slovenia. Since 2008, the Management Board and Scientific Council of the Slovenian Research Agency adopted (i) rules on the procedures for (co-)financing and monitoring the implementation of research activities, and (ii) a methodology for evaluating applications to calls for proposals which are in line with EU standards. Funding agencies are independent and they base their decisions on excellence. There are no thematic priorities.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Slovenia does not allocate institutional funding for R&D to research performing organisations. The institutional funding provided under the founder's obligations comprises part of the administrative costs, the fixed operating costs and the fixed costs of maintaining and repairing property and equipment. This implies that institutions have little room for manoeuvre in terms of strategic management. However "stable" funding is allocated directly to research groups.  Research groups are evaluated every 3-5 years, which, in rare cases (cca 5%) may result in discontinued funding of some research groups. In such a case, the funds are reallocated to another group within the same institution, so that the total funding on institutional level does not change. Consequently, "Share of institutional funding allocated on the basis of institutional assessment" is reported to be 0.

The National Reform Programme 2013 proposes to increase the institutional funding that is linked with the regular evaluation of research institutes and universities.

However, the situation may evolve in the future because national authorities have indicated that it is necessary to allocating a larger share of the funding to the basic institutional funding in order to empower the institutions (research centres and universities) to develop a strategic management within their organisations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 7.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in Slovenia allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Slovenia dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Slovenia's participation in the total participation is 0.8 % and the country received 0.4 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 74 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 4.5 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period). The RISS supports to intensifying cooperation within the European Union, especially in EU programmes and networks. Within this, a strong link between public-private research activities should be formed, further encouraging enterprises to participate with their R&D activities in the EU multilateral R&D and innovation programmes.

Concerning joint programming initiatives, the country participates in four of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy diet for healthy life and Connecting climate knowledge for Europe.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in three programmes in FP7. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in three of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 39 ERA-Nets, of which seven are currently still running. The country has also participated in seven ERA-Net Plus actions - of which three are still running (CORE organic plus, HERA JRP CR and WSF) - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, Slovenia participates with Greece, Belgium and Switzerland. Additionally, the country participates in the European Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy, which has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region, and by the end of 2013, six scientific clusters had been launched, for example, a cluster in energy and sustainability research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has not developed a specific policy. However, the RISS exposes the necessity for strong bilateral cooperation in the field of R&D, especially with the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China). The RISS also states that the scientific cooperation should be improved with the most advanced countries, while for the South-eastern European countries (Western Balkans), Slovenia should become a 'hosting country for their excellent researchers and enterprises'. In 2012, the SRA co-financed 584 bilateral projects with 25 countries, which mainly covers the travel expenses of Slovenian researchers abroad and the daily costs of foreign researchers in Slovenia.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in Slovenia allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Slovenia, the organisations do not receive funding from third countries.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported by the Slovenian Research Agency, wich plays the role of the ‘executing agency’ following the lead agency decisions and adopting their evaluations as the domestic ones. One such case is the case of Slovenian-Belgian Flemish cooperation, where the Flemish evaluation is taken as the Slovenian one. The Slovenian Research Agency is a member of the European Science Foundation Forum on Peer Review. The Slovenian Research Agency undersigned one Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the unilateral administration and mutual recognition of evaluation procedures with the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). In 2014, Slovenia signed a Lead Agency Agreement (ARRS-OTKA) - Memorandum of Understanding with the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund, OTKA. When researchers from Slovenia are positively evaluated in an international peer review but not selected at the calls of the European Research Council (ERC) or by EUROCORES at the European Science Foundation, they can present their candidature in national call for the complementary scheme, which is permanently opened. In terms of interoperability, the legislation is in favour of cross-border cooperation and some measures have been adopted by the SRA, but progress is hindered by a single factor: the use of the Slovenian language. For example, only a few calls for projects/applications are prepared on a bilingual basis (Slovenian-English): it is the same with the issue of basic legal documents.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 67.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is higher than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in Slovenia allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Slovenia participates in the following large international research infrastructures: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN) and European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA). In 2012, the country contributed 0.02 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation into the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of eight (16 %) of them. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures (Ris), Slovenia is committed to funding five of them. They are: CESSDA, DARIAH, ESSurvey , SHARE-ERIC and FAIR. The convention on FAIR has been ratified by Slovenia, in which the country is planning to invest over EUR 20 million (around EUR 2.1 million in 2013). The Ministry of Education, Science and Sport allocates national funds to finance participation and construction of ESFRI projects and some other large Ris. This part is allocated non-competitively.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Slovenia is involved in two of the seven consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries. The country is member of SHARE-ERIC and of European Spallation Source Survey (ESS ERIC).

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures, the national Roadmap on Research Infrastructures (RIR) was published in 2010-2011. The RISS proposes a systematic support to research infrastructure consortia, which will enable their successful operation, long-term management and development of integrated services with regards to specific needs in particular areas, open access, necessary training for users, efficient use of equipment, and provision of support to users in interpreting the results. The roadmap includes references to the participation of Slovenia in the development of the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI Roadmap and includes planned expenditure per ESFRI project. RIR 2011-2020 also exposes the necessity to enhance the cross-border development of research infrastructures, especially in fields where comparable research equipment in Europe or the comparable infrastructure in the neighbourhood is not available. The National Reform Programme 2014 confirms that Slovenia is implementing the national programme in the field of research infrastructures and is actively participating in the establishment of the ERIC. It also indicates that the upgrading of infrastructure for research and innovation and capacities for development of excellence in research and innovation, and the promotion of competence centres, especially those of European interest, will be one of the investment areas defined in the Partnership Agreement for the use of European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Access to research infrastructures is available to those already established (cf. Centres of Excellence etc.) as nationals and foreign citizens. However, Slovenia has quite complex legislation regarding fees for the use of RIs. Since 2009, the European Commission has funded access to five of the research infrastructures coordinated by Slovenia: TANIJS, P3-IMI-MF, SLONMR, SLONMR, JSI TRIGA REACTOR.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Slovenia in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Slovenia Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

There were 8774 FTE researchers in Slovenia in 2011. This represents 8.6 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 12.7 in Slovenia compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 41 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

The fundamental recruitment system for researchers in public research and higher education institutions is based on general rules which are mandatory for all public servants in Slovenia. Additionally, the Slovenian Research Agency, which is responsible for funding, evaluation and distribution of national public funds for research activities, provides merit-based, open and transparent rules on funding different research activities (programmes, projects, young researchers, international cooperation, science meetings etc.) The Agency provides transparent procedures for evaluation and selection by public calls. All criteria and indicators, including the research and bibliometric references for evaluation and selection, are publicly available through its website.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Slovenian Rectors Conference signed the ‘Charter & Code’ principles in 2008. By May 2014, 5 Slovenian organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers of which 3 had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code.

The Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia 2011-2020 sets out to achieve greater development of human resources by increasing funding. The Strategy aims to attract excellent research staff with new incentives in the fields of tax, labour and immigration inter alia, and including the mobility of researchers between public research organisations and business. The Strategy also provides for more funds to be available for areas designated as national priorities based on Slovenia's recognised competencies and competitive advantage in science and business. In addition, the Strategy calls for national efforts in support of the development of research careers comparable to international efforts, regardless of the area of research work, and primarily in conformity with the premises of the European common framework for the development of careers in scientific research.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.7 in 2011 compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

The main idea of the National Higher Education Programme 2011-2020 is that Slovenian higher education must be of quality and to enable excellent scientific and research development. Its goals included some which are also relevant to increasing the quality of doctoral training like the internationalisation of study programmes, students and professors as well as research staff. A very successful example of doctoral study is the Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School (IPS) established by the Jožef Stefan Institute (JSI)in 2004 as an independent higher education institution. It is strongly supported by industry (Gorenje, Kolektor and Salonit) and an international network of cooperating universities and research institutes from the European Union, Japan, the USA, and a number of other countries.

One of the main instruments for funding doctoral candidates in Slovenia is the Young Researchers, programme. It has a long tradition and has contributed significantly to increasing the quality and scope of research and to new recruitment procedures for research teams. Through this programme, Slovenia strives to renew human resources in research and education organisations, increase the research capacity of research groups and raise human resource potential in both the private and public sectors. Young Researchers participate in basic or applied research projects during their postgraduate studies. They also sign regular, fixed-term employment contracts. They receive their salaries, social contributions, and material and non-material costs for research and postgraduate study.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 7.2% in Slovenia compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 6.4% in Slovenia compared with 16.9% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

The Slovenian Research Agency annually runs a public call to co-finance renowned researchers from abroad. It co-finances an uninterrupted three-month working visit by a renowned foreign researcher to a Slovenian research group with the aim of improving the research performance of that group and preparing a joint paper for a top-ranking journal. During these three months, the foreign researcher must give at least two public lectures that are at least one month apart. The public call is launched yearly for up to eight renowned foreign researchers working in the fields of natural, technical, medical, biotechnical, social or human sciences. Insecure career prospects and low salaries are the main obstacles to inward mobility of Slovenian researchers. For foreign researchers, unattractive pay is the main obstacle to moving to Slovenia to work.

The Young Researchers Programme stimulates the international mobility of doctoral candidates.

The Young Researchers in the Economy programme is designed to introduce more highly educated staff into private companies and stimulate companies to hire young graduates to enhance their R&D and innovation activities. The support is mainly financial, providing co-financing for salaries and some materials costs for a young researcher who is employed in a company while pursuing a PhD at the university. Through this support the young researcher engages in research work with mentoring by both the company and university. The programme was run by SPIRIT Slovenia in the 2007-2013 financial cycle and was co-financed by the European Social Fund. The beneficiaries are enterprises and technology centres − as employers of young researchers, and research organisations and universities – as providers of formal education.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The fifth priority of RISS 2011-2020 indicates that legal and other barriers should be removed for improving the recruitment, career progression and retention of women in science and to focus attention onto the role of gender in research. A consultative body Commission for women in Science organises debates, publishes some materials, opens discussions etc. However, the Action Plan for improving career opportunities for researchers in all career periods, which should detail the corresponding areas and activities, remains under preparation. Slovenia has set up a gender equality strategy in research institutions but the gap between men and women is not markedly large in research.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Men and women are treated equally in all procedures, even after maternity leave, which can be divided between a man and a woman on the basis of their respective decision. The law guarantees that after the end of the maternity/paternity leave, both (men and women) will return to the same positions.

The Slovenian Scientific Foundation participates in conducting with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and L’Oréal programme 'For Women in Science' which grants scholarships for female researchers (up to three per year).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 49.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers in the limited compliance cluster is high.

There seems to be no national policies fostering gender as criteria in research programmes.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 45.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey did not indicate support for the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content is lower than within the EU ERA compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content in the limited compliance cluster is high.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision-making, the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport (MESS) is committed to complying with the principle of gender-balanced representation in the composition of all bodies appointed in the field of science, in accordance with the Resolution on the National Programme for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men for 2010-2011. There is no positive action, for example in the inclusion of quotas.

The Slovenian government has set national targets on the gender composition of expert bodies, public research institutions and agencies, requiring those bodies to be composed of a minimum of one-third of both sexes. Within the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) there is a Regulation on the operation of permanent and temporary expert bodies for research, stating that such bodies should be composed of at least one-third of either gender – one-fifth in technical sciences.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 11.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Slovenia is higher than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access (OA), the Slovenian Research Infrastructure Roadmap 2011-2020 indicates that results from publicly funded research must be available to the public. It also points out that digitalisation and public access of digitalised materials should be systematically regulated and upgraded.

Related to open access to publications, there is still no national policy. However, there are some measures supporting green open access.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 32.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 17.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, no specific policy has been identified.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 6.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 28.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support open access to data.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing organisations making publicly funded scientific research data available online and free of charge is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research data available online and free of charge in the limited compliance cluster is high.

With respect to repositories, the RIR exposes the fact that a national repository of scientific data should be established, stating that storage and access to scientific data (a national repository) must be provided. Such a central national repository system, which must have the ability to connect to the Slovenian current research information system (SICRIS), will connect to EU repositories, thus increasing the visibility and value (citation) of Slovenian science worldwide. The national library (NUK),  known as the 'NUK network' presents an entry point for access to national and international sources and databases. Some universities’ libraries (Dikul, Dkum, University of Primorska library) focus more on specific topics and are a deposit for some research papers, research reports, etc. being produced at their faculties (member of each university). The Institute of Information Science (IZUM) is a public institution that is an information infrastructural service for Slovenian science, culture and education.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, the Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia (RISS) proposes co-financing, until 2020, activities in the business sector for strengthening education and training the employed in the R&D area, and making organisational improvements in this area. It also proposes the following measures: the regulation of intellectual property rights among stakeholders for the commercialisation of research results and the establishment of support for patenting by public research organisations (PROs). The current legislation makes it very difficult for PROs or higher educational institutions (HEIs) to establish a spin-off, since it requires special permission to be issued by the government. Funding organisations are not supporting the professionalisation of knowledge transfer activities.

Strategic partnership and/or the definition of joint collaborative research agendas between academia and industry are supported in Slovenia. The establishment of centres of excellence and centres of competence seek to bridge the gap between academia and industry. The eight centres of excellence are high-quality multidisciplinary groups of researchers from both academic and business spheres, combining critical mass of knowledge and adequate research infrastructure for a potential breakthrough to top-level science and/or for inclusion in international networks of excellence. They contribute to the efficient flow of knowledge and applications into products and services.

Seven competence centres are defined as research development centres, run by industrial partners, which connect partners from the economic and public research sectors, and aim at strengthening development capability and the use of new technologies for the development of new competitive products, services and processes in the priority areas of technological development. Also, the Research Voucher programme helps enterprises to commission research at R&D institutes and HEIs for a period of three years. Funding is allocated on a first come, first served basis. Furthermore, there is support for the implementation of research training agreements with private sector organisations and to structured programmes for placements in the private sector for researchers.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 9.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 42 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovenia who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector in the limited compliance cluster is high.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities in the limited compliance cluster is high.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities in the limited compliance cluster is high.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster, but it is quite important in the case of the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

As regards the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a research and education network, essential to make digital services possible. ARNES is the Slovenian National Research and Education Network (NREN), a specialised internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. Concerning the development of e-infrastructures, the Slovenian Research Agency channels the funding for the development of digitalisation and knowledge access for all Slovenian libraries and the interested public (COBISS), notably through its infrastructural financing. Because it is funded by public funds, COBISS is available for all internet users.

Concerning digital services, the country provides federated services, cloud services, and premium services, such as consultancy services.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 38.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations providing digital research services in the limited compliance cluster is high.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Slovenia was a member of an identity federation in 2011. The country is also a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 13.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster. However, the share of research performing organisations providing federated electronic identities to their researchers in the limited compliance cluster is high.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 19 research performing organisations in Slovenia answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 17.1% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Slovenia shows that 15.8 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 68.4 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 15.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 13.9 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 80.5 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 5.6 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

However, it should be highlighted that two major RPOs did not respond to the survey. Also, the high share of institutions in the limited ERA compliant cluster may reflect the fact that one tool to foster ERA is performance based institutional funding, which is non existant in Slovenia.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

National smart specialisation strategy || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Methodology for evaluating applications, adopted by the Slovenian Research Agency to calls for proposals || 2008 || ||

Law on Research and Development || 2011 || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Memorandum of Understanding on the unilateral administration and mutual recognition of evaluation procedures with the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) || 2010 || ||

Memorandum of Understanding with the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund, OTKA || 2014 || X || X

Lead agency agreement with Flemish Research Foundation || 2012 || X ||

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia and the Research Infrastructure Roadmap || 2011 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Attractive careers

Euraxess SI || || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

GENDER-NET (ERA-NET project) || 2013 || X || X

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia || 2011 || ||

Normative act of Slovenian Research Agency (SRA) || 2008 || ||

Principle of Equal Treatment Act || 2004 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

Slovenian tax guide 2013 || 2013 || X || X

Development centres Centres of excellence Competence centres || 2010 || ||

Co-financing of PhD training programme || 2010 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Research and Innovation Strategy of Slovenia and the Research Infrastructure Roadmap || 2011 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

eduGAIN || || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economy (ME) and the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sports (MESRS). The latter is the highest governmental body responsible for policy- and decision-making in the field of science and technology.

The national science and technology policy is prepared and coordinated by the MESRS in cooperation with other ministries, the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS), higher education institutions (HEIs), associations of employers, and industrial research organisations. The Slovak Government Council for Science, Technology and Innovations (SGCI)  is the most important body for the coordination of science and technology (S&T) policies and coordinates central government agencies involved in the development of the knowledge-based economy.

The main public bodies responsible for allocating research funds are the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sports (MESRS) and the Slovak Academy of Science (SAS). Both the MESRS and SAS have their own chapters in the State Budget Laws. The MESRS directly funds the HEIs, the Research and Development Agency (RDA) and the VEGA (Scientific Grant Agency, Grantová agentúra ) and KEGA (Cultural and Educational Grant Agency) grant agencies (addressing higher education as well as the Academy of Sciences; and humanities, respectively). The MESRS also manages the Structural Fund Agency (ASFEU). The ASFEU is the implementing agency for the Operational Programme 'Research Development', a major source of European funding for the Slovak research system. The RDA provides for tendering and funding grants to public and private research bodies. The agency has become an increasingly important source of finance for many Research and development (R&D) activities, in particular applied research. The SAS consists of 69 research organisations, of which 48 are budgetary and 21 are subsidised.

At the end of 2013, the country adopted the Research and Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation of the Slovak Republic (RIS3) of Slovakia. It presents several far-reaching reforms: (i) merging eight incumbent research, development and innovation (RDI) government agencies into two: the Science Agency and the Technology Agency; (ii) changing the proportion of support to basic and applied research from the current ratio of 2:1 to 1:2 by 2020; (iii) introducing a ‘mandatory indicator of the state support to R&D as a percentage of GDP [gross domestic product] in the State Budget Law’, and (iv) re-organising HEIs and transforming the Slovak Academy of Sciences.

In June 2014, the Council recommended that Slovakia Improves the quality and relevance of the science base.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in Slovakia represented EUR 55 per inhabitant in 2012 (compared to an average of EUR 179 in the EU-28). In 2013, the GBAORD per inhabitant declined to EUR 49. In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.1 % of total government expenditures and 0.4 % of gross domestic product (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of the GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of total GBAORD in Slovakia has been higher than the growth rate of total EU GBAORD. The GBAORD as a share of GDP has evolved positively in Slovakia, even when it regressed at the EU-28 level.

The 2013 National Reform Programme indicated that overall expenditures on science, research and innovation should amount to 1.2 % of GDP in 2020. Amendments to the Act on Research and Development Incentives and the Act on the Organisation of State Support for Research and Development should ensure ‘clear, predictable and equal criteria’ for the funding of R&D in public research organisations (PROs) and private companies. According to the NRP, the PROs will be better motivated to ‘improve cooperation with the private sector and recruit high-quality researchers’.

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Public HEIs can apply for three types of national research grants. These are provided by the VEGA Grant Agency, the KEGA Grant Agency and the Research and Development Agency (RDA). The VEGA grants supporting basic research in HEIs and the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS) are traditionally labelled as institutional funding (in terms of being designed solely for public HEIs and the SAS) but are allocated on a competitive basis. The KEGA grants supported pedagogic innovations in HEIs. The competitive RDA grants fund basic and applied research in all HEIs, the SAS and private research bodies. In 2012, the SAS allocated around 15.9 % of its budget as project-based (not accounting structural and investment funding, Seventh Framework Programme projects and other sources of income). Slovak HEIs and the SAS also participated in projects funded from the structural and investment funds (the Operational Programme 'Research and Development' (OPRD) and the Operational Programme 'Education' (OPE). The projects were channelled via the Structural Fund Agency of the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sports.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 100 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review are used to evaluate all national public competitive funding. The rules for the VEGA, KEGA and the Research and Development Agency (RDA) grants are that applications are peer-reviewed. One peer reviewer should be foreign researcher. These agencies and accreditation commissions mostly engage experts from the Czech Republic (for reason of language and cultural proximity) or Slovak citizens employed with foreign higher education and research institutions. The structural and investment fund projects are evaluated by the domestic evaluators only.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Funding to RPOs is partly allocated based on institutional assessment.

For HEI, the MESRS while defining the amount of subsidy for research, development or artistic activities, the research, development or artistic capacity of the public higher education institution, the achieved results in the field of science, technology or art, evaluation of research, development, artistic and other creative activity of the public higher education institution by Accreditation Commission within the framework of complex accreditation and classification of the public higher education institution among research universities, university-type higher education institutions or non-university type higher education institutions, are decisive, Other criteria for funding allocation includes: share of a HEI in total foreign R&D grants for Slovak HEIs; share of a HEI in total domestic R&D grants for Slovak HEIs; share of a HEI in total number of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) students in Slovakia; share of a HEI in total scientific publications in Slovakia; and share of a HEI in total art output in Slovakia. The Accreditation Commission of the Slovak Government evaluates the higher education institutions every six years.

The organisations of the SAS have been evaluated regularly by their own Accreditation Commission since 1992. The scientometric indicators prepared by the independent Academic Ranking and Rating Agency were used to assist the work of the Accreditation Commission for the first time. There is a limited link between the evaluation results and support to particular institutes in the SAS. In 2013, the SAS could re-distribute 5 % of the total wage budget based on evaluation results.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate institutional funding.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It supports also bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support transnational cooperation.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in Slovakia dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is zero.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of Slovakia's participation in the total participation is 0.4 % and the country received 0.2 % of total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 13 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) for the 2007-2013 period and 4 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3 % of GERD for the same period).

Concerning Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the country participates in three of the ten ongoing initiatives. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe and Healthy diet for healthy life.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in two programmes in FP7. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in two of the four existing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 14 ERA-Nets, of which five are currently still running. The country has also participated in three ERA-Net Plus actions - of which one is still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

Concerning research agreements with EU Member States and/or Associated Countries, the 2010 New Model of Financing Science and Technology in Slovakia makes the MESRS responsible for the country's participation in cross-border initiatives and it is allocated a budget of EUR 1 million for its activities. Fifteen multilateral schemes support joint research agendas, both with ERA countries and outside the ERA. Slovakia has concluded bilateral agreements on scientific and technological cooperation with the following countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Slovenia, and Spain. In 2012, bilateral schemes supported 135 projects (EUR 0.3 million) with seven ERA countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Romania, the Czech Republic, France, Portugal and Slovenia) and 15 projects (EUR 35 000) with Serbia. Support to mobility schemes did not aim at specific joint research agendas. Additionally, the country participates in the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR), a multilateral (and macro-regional) strategy that has been developed by the Commission in cooperation with 11 countries in the Danube region (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine). It comprises science and technology cooperation across the region and, by the end of 2013, six scientific clusters had been launched, for example a cluster on energy and sustainability research.

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the most important agreements outside the ERA referred to Slovakia’s participation in the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna (Russia). There are also bilateral agreements on scientific and technological cooperation with the following countries: China, Egypt, India, the Republic of South Africa, the Russian Federation, South Korea, Ukraine and the United States of America.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support international cooperation with third countries.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovenia, the share of research and development budget originating from third countries amongst research performing organisations which answered the survey is higher within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The Slovak 172/2005 Law on the Organisation of the State Support to Research and Development does not allow for interoperability of national R&D programmes, with the exception of bilateral and multilateral cooperation programmes outside joint programming initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support the allocation of project-based funding on peer- reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not allocate project-based funding based on peer-reviewed decisions made by non-national institutions.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Slovakia participates in the following large international research infrastructures: European Space Agency (ESA), Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), European x-ray free election laser (EU.XFEL) and Institute Laue-Langevin (ILL). In 2012, the country contributed 1.9 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by CERN, the ESRF, the ILL and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of three (6 %) of them. The "Action plan for building R&D in Slovakia" announces the continued support to the Slovak participation in the ESFRI Roadmap projects in which the country is involved: European XFEL, ESRF, ILL 20/20, ESSurvey, FAIR and PRACE. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, Slovakia is currently committed to funding one of them: European XFEL.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC), Slovakia is not involved in any of the consortia that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures, Slovakia is preparing the Action plan for building R&D in Slovakia. It will propose to build infrastructures that are linked to priority areas for research and development, concentrating on a critical mass of human potential, the necessary technical infrastructure and the necessary competencies of coordination and management. It is expected that the action plan will be connected with the research infrastructures mentioned in the ESFRI roadmap.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In terms of access to research infrastructures, access is provided for foreign researchers under bilateral and multilateral schemes in S&T cooperation.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for Slovakia in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Slovakia _Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

There were 15326 FTE researchers in Slovakia in 2011. This represents 5.7 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 5.3 among the Innovation Union reference group (Moderate Innovators) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS Jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 0.2 in Slovakia compared with 39.9 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7

In 2012, 52 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

In the Slovak Republic, institutions generally implement their own recruitment policy. The autonomy of the institutions cannot be influenced by the State.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The Rector’s Conference as well as the Slovak Academy of Sciences have adopted and are implementing the ‘Charter & Code’ principles.

By May 2014, 2 Slovak organisations were involved in the Commission’s Human Resources Strategy for Researchers.

There are several measures to increase researchers’ funding opportunities in Slovakia. The VEGA – the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic and the Slovak Academy of Sciences – offers scientific grants in the fields of basic research in all fields of science. Created in 1996, VEGA is one of the basic financial tools of project-based funding, with a budget of approximately EUR 10 million each year.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 1.9 in 2011 compared with 1.2 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

In 2007, the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic established the Agency of the Slovak Republic for the Structural Funds of EU (ASFEÚ). Its main objective is to ensure the continuous process of acceptance, assessment, financial management and monitoring of projects funded under the EU Structural Funds for the period 2007–13. It carries out activities as the managing authority for the Operational Programme Education and Operational Programme Research and Development. One of the priority axes under the Operational Programme Education is Axis 2 ‘Life-long Learning as the Basic Principle of a Knowledge Society’ with the aim of supporting life-long learning in different R&D sectors and increasing the quality of education. In addition, the update of the Long-Term Plan of the State Science and Technology Policy by 2015 (Phoenix Strategy) promotes life-long learning activities by supporting joint doctoral programmes in English, developing lifelong learning training courses at a post-doc level and encouraging international cooperation schemes between Slovak and foreign institutions.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU-27 Member State was 6.7% in Slovakia compared with 4.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7%. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 1.4% in Slovakia compared with 5.2% among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2%.

The Slovak Research and Development Agency under the “Programme for Human Potential Support in R&D and Science Popularisation” promotes projects oriented towards the reintegration of citizens of the Slovak Republic with a PhD who had spent more than two years continuously working at research and development institutions abroad. The Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic is promoting bilateral cooperation programmes with twelve EU and non-EU countries, thus encouraging scientific collaboration and mobility of researchers. The bilateral calls for cooperation are managed by the Slovak Research and Development Agency (SRDA) and involve the following countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, China, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Serbia, South Africa, and Ukraine.

The update of The Long-term Plan of the State Science and Technology Policy by 2015 (Phoenix Strategy) encourages researchers to move from the public to the business sector. The SIEA (the Slovak Innovation and Energy Agency) was established under the Ministry of Economy to boost business sector innovation and to support innovation. The Agency aims to strengthen the links between industry and research through the creation of regional innovation structures involving municipalities, universities, academy institutes and firms.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Slovakia adopted a number of legislative measures to ensure gender equality in general: the Slovak Constitution (2001), Labour Code Law (2011) and the 365/2004 Antidiscrimination Law pronounce on gender equality. There are no specific actions in support of gender equality in science. This may be explained by the fact that Slovakia accounted for above-average rates of female researcher employment in the R&D sector (42.6 % in Slovakia in 2003-2011, 32.4 % in the EU-27 in 2003-2009). The Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS) started monitoring gender balance in science in 2000.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey did not declare any support to gender equality in public research. No RPO seem to have adopted Gender Equality Plans.

All women in Slovakia are entitled up to the three years maternity leave. The Labour Code (Law No 311/2001) guarantees their return to the same type of work. The only exception to this rule is the fixed-term contract, which does not guarantee the right for returning to the same type of work after maternity leave.

SAS established the Gender Equality Commission in 2005. The cultural change policies are fostered via the Central Information Portal for Science and Technology (2013) which publishes information on Slovak female scientists: the success stories, interviews and profiles of excellent female Slovak researchers. The information is part of the strategy on the 'popularisation of science'.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Some public sector bodies collect evidence on gender issues in science. In 2005, the SAS started to follow gender-mainstreaming policies and established the Commission on Gender Equality to collect statistics on women's participation in doctoral studies, academic funding and evaluation bodies, and managerial posts.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 3.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support the inclusion of gender dimension in research content/programmes.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

Concerning gender balance in decision-making, no legal provisions are in place to improve gender representation in academic and research committees, boards and governing bodies.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in Slovakia is equal to 0.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access, the Long-term Objective of the State S&T Policy up to 2015 supports modernising the infrastructure and improving access to scientific information by Slovak scientists and the business sector. Two national projects promoting the access to and the preservation of scientific information to the scientific community, university students and businesses were carried out by the Slovak Centre of Scientific and Technical Information (SCST), the national information centre and the specialised scientific library of Slovakia. However, there does not seem to be an explicit policy existing on open access (OA).

With regard to open access to publications, no specific policy has been identified.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 62.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support OA to publications.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, no specific policy has been identified.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 0 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 36 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 36.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey indicated that they do not have measures to support open access to data.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations making scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

With regard to repositories, Slovakia is the project 'Infrastructure for research and development – the data centre for research and development', with the aim of building a data centre that will store, process, and provide access to information that is needed by Slovak scientific organisations while carrying out their R&D activities.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, Slovakia has embedded knowledge transfer in its RIS3, which fosters the open circulation of knowledge between companies and research organisations. The strategy implementation will be accompanied by a monitoring system. One of the specific measures mentioned in the strategy is the development of innovative capacities through cooperation between enterprises and research institutions in key sectors of the Slovak economy, which is accompanied by specific funding.

The Centre of Patent Information in Slovakia is a contact point of the Industrial Property Office of Slovakia and its main mission is to provide researchers and the public with basic information about the possibilities of industrial and legal protection of technological solutions, inventions, trademarks and designs in the country and abroad. The Technology Transfer Centre (SCSTI) participates in building and operating on the national system of technology transfer support and is responsible for the administration and operation of the national technology transfer portal. It supports the establishment and development of local technology transfer offices (TTOs) and provides information and professional support to research and scientific organisations in the technology transfer processes, starting with intellectual property (IP) protection and ending with its commercialisation.

The project called National infrastructure for supporting technology transfer in Slovakia, which is partly funded by the European Regional Development Fund, supports R&D activities that reflect the real needs of the entrepreneurial sector. At the same time, it supports the creation of long-term partnerships between academy and industry. This project will end in 2014.

In June 2014, the Council of the European Union recommended that Slovakia implements plans to foster effective knowledge transfer and co-operation between academia, research and business. Strategic partnership in the form of support to the creation of consortia for solving multidisciplinary problems and embedding sectors through clusters and other forms of networking will be supported through the implementation of the RIS3.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 39.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 32.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 16.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The research funders in Slovakia who responded to the survey did not indicated support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full-time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster, but quite high in the limited compliance to ERA cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the country has implemented a research and education network, which is essential to make digital services possible. The policies for research and education-related public e-infrastructures and for associated digital research services are implemented by the Slovak Academic Network (SANET), which is a member of GÉANT. The SANET is an independent civil association (non-profit body), whose members agreed with the conditions to provide each other with Internet services. By 2013, the SANET had 322 members (including all Slovak universities, institutes of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, scientific libraries, primary and secondary schools and several state institutions and municipalities). In 2013, Slovakia reported backbone capacities of 100 GBps (Gigabytes per second).

Concerning digital services, several institutions are members of the Trans-European Research and Education Networking Association, which offers a forum to collaborate, innovate and share knowledge in order to foster the development of Internet technology, infrastructure and services to be used by the research and education community. In 2013, there were 38 HEIs, 20 research institutes, seven institutes of further education and six libraries connected to TERENA in Slovakia. This represents between 60 % and 80 % of the universities and less than half of the other institutions.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 36 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 21.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

Slovakia has not joined an identity federation and the country is not a member of eduGAIN, a service intended to enable the trustworthy exchange of information related to identity, authentication and authorisation between the GÉANT (GN3plus) partners' federations.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 4.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in Slovakia, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is similar to that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 24 research performing organisations in Slovakia answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 7.9% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in Slovakia shows that 16.7 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 54.2 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 29.2 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 40.6 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 41.2 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 18.2 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

Research and Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation of the Slovak Republic || 2013 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

The 172/2005 Law on Organisation of State support to R&D || 2005 || ||

The Fenix Strategy: Update of the Long-Term Objective of the State Science and Technology Policy up to 2015 (adopted by Government Resolution 461/2011) Minerva 2.0 for the knowledge-based economy || 2011 || ||

New Model of Financing Science and Technology in the Slovak Republic || 2010 || ||

Amendment of Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) || 2012 || X ||

Evaluation procedures and criteria for the 2010-2012 general call || 2010 || ||

Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) Act 133/2002 on the Slovak Acedemy of Sciences (SAS) || 2002 || ||

Competitive grants || 2000 || ||

Rules of evaluation by the Accreditation Commission for the HEIs and the Slovak Academy of Sciences Act 131/2002 on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) || 2007 || ||

Institutional funding || || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Strategy for excellent science, research and development || 2013 || X || X

Implementing joint research agendas

Information on International Co-operation in Science and Technology in 2011 (MESRS 2012) || 2012 || X ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Joint Programming Initiatives, Article 185, COST, EUREKA || 2010 || ||

Bilateral co-operation in science and technology || 1980 || ||

Visegrad fund || 2000 || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Infrastructure of Research and Development - strategy and draft roadmap || 2011 || ||

The Cyclotron Centre || 1999 || ||

Participation in ESFRI Activities Participation in infrastructures of European interest || || ||

Centre of Excellence Programme || 2007 || ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Bilateral and multilateral co-operation in science and technology || || ||

Attractive careers

General labour market measures The 404/2001 Law on Residence by Foreigners The Decree of the Government of the Slovak Republic No. 391/2004 Draft amendment of Law on Qualification Degree Documents || 2011 || ||

The European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers || 2011 || ||

EURAXESS Slovakia || 2004 || ||

Human Resources in Research and Development and Popularisation (2006-2010) || 2006 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Central Information Portal for Science and Technology || 2004 || ||

The Slovak Constitution (2001) The Labour Code Law (Law No. 311/2001) The 365/2004 Antidiscrimination Law || 2004 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Infrastructure for research and development - Data centre for research and development || 2007 || ||

Operational Programme Research and Development projects: National information system supporting research and development in Slovakia Infrastructure for research and development - Data centre for research and development || 2009 || ||

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

National infrastructure for supporting technology transfer in Slovakia || 2010 || ||

Technology transfer centre SCSTI || || ||

Centre of Patent Information in Slovakia || 2011 || ||

MESRS call supporting five clusters initiatives || 2012 || X ||

Operational Programme Research and Development projects: Transfer of knowledge and technology from research and development into practice || 2008 || ||

Strategy to create a national technology transfer system || 2013 || X || X

Establishment conditions to foster cooperation between academy and industry Reassessment of IP rules || 2013 || X || X

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Slovak Academic Network (SANET). || 1992 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Membership of the TERENA network TLS/SSL server certificates via SANET TCS Server || 2011 || ||

1.   MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

   1.1.   Research and innovation system

Research and innovation policies are the responsibility of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) which plays the lead executive role in research issues. It has oversight for the majority of research and development (R&D) policy formulation, and is the main author of strategic policies for R&D and innovation. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) provides funds for the seven Research Councils, each organised on a broad disciplinary basis, which in turn support R&D both in higher education institutions (HEIs) and in their own institutions. Research Councils develop their specific R&D policies.

The country adopted the Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth in 2011. It sets out the government's approach to boosting business investment in innovation and ensuring the United Kingdom's success in the global economy. It indicates that investments will focus on critical areas that only government can fund. The National Reform Programme (NRP) 2014 announces the adoption of a new strategy for research and innovation before the end of 2014. It also indicates that actions in support of the eight great technologies have been developed in partnership with the United Kingdoms's Research Councils, Technology Strategy Board and Foresight projects conducted by the Government Office for Science. The Welsh Government’s strategy, Science for Wales, adopted in 2012, seeks to attract world-class scientific talent to Wales and to generate critical mass in key areas of scientific research through the creation of three new national research networks in the grand challenge areas.

In terms of research and innovation (R&I) funding, the Government Budget Appropriations or Outlays for Research and Development (GBAORD) in the United Kingdom represented EUR 174 per inhabitant in 2012, slightly below the EU-28 average (EUR 179.2). In 2012, the total GBAORD corresponded to 1.2 % of total government expenditures and 0.57% of gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat).

The analysis of the evolution of GBAORD in the period during the economic crisis (2007-2012) shows that in nominal terms, the growth rate of the total GBAORD in the United Kingdom has been higher than the growth rate of the total EU GBAORD. However, the GBAORD as a share of GDP has regressed more in the United Kingdom than the regression observed in the EU-28.

However, government support is also provided for business in the form of R&D tax credits. In the financial year ending March 2012, R&D tax credits provided almost GBP 1.2 billion of relief to over 12 000 companies, supporting around GBP 11.9 billion of expenditure (NRP2014).

In the 'Spending Round 2013' publication, the government announced it would maintain resource funding for science in nominal terms at GBP 4.6 billion in 2015-2016 and increase capital funding in real terms from GBP 0.6 billion in 2012-2013 to GBP 1.1 billion in 2015-2016. The government also set a long-term capital budget for science in the next Parliament, which will grow in line with inflation through to 2020-2021 (NRP 2014).

   1.2.   Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

As regards project-based funding, public funding is allocated via a process that is firmly based on open calls for proposals with independent evaluations and peer reviews using national and international reviewers.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || National level || 80 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as project-based funding || EU level || 66.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support project-based funding is higher than the EU average.

The core principles of international peer review prevail in the assessment of proposals for research funding. Proposals are assessed for scientific quality by a number of senior academics or peers, from the United Kingdom and overseas, who work within relevant areas of research. This assessment or "review" provides the basis of the funding decision. The peer review processes employed are designed to be sensitive to the different needs and cultures that exist within the academic community and also reflect the variety of mechanisms employed to support different types of research e.g. basic or strategic research, or the need to encourage adventurous or multidisciplinary research.

   1.3.   Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Institutional funding is almost always allocated based on institutional assessment. The government allocates block institutional funding (for research) via the Higher Education Funding Councils and their equivalents. The vast majority of the money is divided between institutions using formulae to determine each one’s share. These formulae take into account certain factors for each institution, including the number and type of students, the subjects taught and the amount and quality of research. Funding allocation is linked to the volume of research (using research-active staff numbers), the relative costs (reflecting, for example, that laboratory-based research is more expensive than library-based research), any government policy priorities for particular subjects and the quality of research as measured in the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). The Research Excellence Framework (REF), a process of expert review, is the new system for assessing the quality of research in the United Kingdom's (HEIs) higher education institutions (HEIs). It will replace the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) and will be completed in 2014. The primary purpose of the REF is to produce assessment outcomes for each submission made by institutions which the funding bodies intend to use to inform the selective allocation of their research funding to HEIs, with effect from 2015-2016. The assessment outcomes provide benchmarking information and establish reputational yardsticks. The criteria used in REFs are quality of outputs: - ‘originality, significance and rigour’-, impacts: - ‘reach’ and ‘significance’ -; and research environment: - ‘vitality and sustainability’ -.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || National level || 20 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated as institutional funding based on institutional assessment and/or evaluation || EU level || 24 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support institutional assessment for the allocation of institutional funding is lower than the EU average.

2.   TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION

   2.1.   Implementing joint research agendas

The country is involved in transnational cooperation. It also strongly supports bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || National level || 2.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' total budget allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D || EU level || 4.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || National level || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with non-national EU organisations || EU level || 1.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders’ total budget in the United Kingdom allocated to transnationally coordinated R&D is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders’ research and development budget in the United Kingdom dedicated to jointly defined research agendas with other EU organisations is lower than the EU average.

Cooperation between institutions of Member States, Associated Countries and Third Countries is fostered by the Framework Programme. In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), the share of the United Kingdom's participation in the total participation is 14.7 % and the country received 16.1 % of the total European Commission contribution. FP7 funding represents EUR 92 per inhabitant (the EU average is EUR 72 per capita) for the period 2007-2013 and 3.7 % of the gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) for the period 2007-2011 (last available data) (the EU average is 3% of GERD for the same period). Scottish EU Research and Innovation Steering Group was established in 2010 to help support the increased participation in European research and innovation programmes. One of the aims of the Steering Group is to ensure that businesses, the academic community and those in the public sector and research and technology organisations are fully informed about and able to respond to the opportunities within Horizon 2020 (NRP 2014).

As regards Joint Programming Initiatives, the country participates in all ten of the ongoing initiatives and is coordinating one of them. These initiatives are Neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer), Food security, Agriculture and climate change, Cultural heritage and global change: a new challenge for Europe, Healthy Diet for Healthy Life, The demographic change (More years, better life), Antimicrobial resistance - An emerging threat to human health, Connecting climate knowledge for Europe, Water challenges for a changing world, Healthy and productive seas and oceans", and Urban Europe - Global Challenges, Local Solutions.

In terms of programmes undertaken jointly by several Member States (so called Article 185 initiatives), the country was involved in five programmes in FP7. In Horizon 2020, the country is already involved in the four ongoing initiatives.

ERA-Nets facilitate the coordination and collaboration of national and regional research programmes, in particular the preparation and implementation of joint calls for transnational research proposals between national and/or regional programmes. The country has participated in a total of 102 ERA-Nets, of which 26 are currently still running. The country has also participated in 11 ERA-Net Plus actions - of which seven are still running - in areas with high European added value and additional EU financial support topping up their joint call for proposals.

The Economic and Social Research Council is a partner in the Open Research Area in Europe for the Social Sciences (ORA), which currently involves four European Member States (the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands).

   2.2.   Openness for international cooperation with third countries and regions

In terms of international cooperation with third countries and regions, the country has developed a suite of routes for engagement which are presented in the 2010 Research Councils United Kingdom (RCUK) International Strategy. It outlines the ways in which RCUK helps the best researchers work together, wherever they are in the world. In terms of implementation, specific agreements have been notably signed with the United States of America (USA), China, India and Brazil. Recently the United Kingdom and China signed an agreement of STR 50 million to carry out joint innovative research programmes to tackle global issues like climate change, long-term renewable energy supplies and human diseases.

In addition, the United Kingdom has several bilateral science and technology agreements with third countries. The Open Research Area in Europe for the Social Sciences (ORA) is bringing in third country participants (India and the United States of America). In the third and most recent joint call, the programme will fund integrated projects realised by researchers from three or more of the five participating countries, in any combination. In addition, the Belmont Forum is a high-level group of the world's major and emerging funders of global environmental change research and international science councils. It was co-founded by the United Kingdom Natural Environment Research Council and the National Science Foundation (USA) in 2009.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || National level || 1.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' research and development budget allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries || EU level || 2.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of organisations' research and development budget amongst responding research performing organisations originating from third countries || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of responding funders' research and development budget in the United Kingdom allocated to collaboration programmes carried out with third countries is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of organisations' research and development budget originating from third countries is higher than that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.

   2.3.   Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Mutual recognition of evaluations that conform to international peer-review standards is supported where conditions are appropriate by the RCUK. In these circumstances the lead agency procedure can be applied, where the participating funding authorities accept the results of the evaluation of international projects done by the ‘lead agency’ and fund the parts of the project that are being performed in their respective countries. RCUK has signed Memoranda of Understanding providing for a lead agency agreement with the State of São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), the United States National Science Foundation (NSF) and in 2013 with Fonds National de la Recherche (FNR) in Luxembourg.

The RCUK is also working with Science Europe to develop a better evidence base for the perceived barriers to cross-border interoperability of national programmes and to consider options for the removal of such barriers where necessary. All seven of the United Kingdom's Research Councils are members of Science Europe. The President of Science Europe, currently Professor Paul Boyle (ESRC CEO), is a member of the Governing Board of the Global Research Council, a voluntary, informal organisation of heads of research councils from around the world, with the remit to find mutually acceptable paths to greater international research collaboration. Some high-level principles were signed off at the first meeting of the Global Research Council policy forum in May 2012. Work is underway at a global level, and based on recent policy activity between European research funding and performing organisations, to develop a set of commonly agreed criteria for peer reviews.

In RCUK Lead Agency arrangements the UK is usually the lead agency, due to the internationally renowned peer review and reputation for funding excellence. RCUK work in close collaboration with international funding partners and build capacity wherever possible.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || National level || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders which can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions || EU level || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || National level || 7.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country || EU level || 0.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and can base their project-based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions is lower than the EU average.

The share of responding funders' project-based research and development budget in the United Kingdom allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country is higher than the EU average.

3.   RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES

   3.1.   Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In 2012, the United Kingdom contributed 1.9 % of the GBAORD to the activities carried out by Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), the European Southern Observatory (ESO), the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) in 2012. The country also participates in the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA)  (Eurostat).

In terms of participation in the development of research infrastructures included in the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) Roadmap, the country participates in the preparatory phase of 15 of them (i.e. 30 %). The country coordinates six of them: ESSurvey, HIPER, ELIXIR,INSTRUCT, ISBE and SKA. In terms of financial commitments to the development of these research infrastructures, the United Kingdom is so far committed to fund nine of them: ESSurvey, HIPER, ELIXIR, EMBRC, INFRAFRONTIER, INSTRUCT, ESRF UPGRADE, ILL 20/20 and SKA. So far, UKRC has dedicated  GBP 66.6 M (EUR 83.9 M) in the preparatory and/or construction phasis of the research infrastructures included in the ESFRI roadmap.

With regard to participation in the European Research Infrastructure Consortiums (ERIC), the United Kingdom (UK) hosts ESS ERIC and is a member of EURO-ARGO ERIC, two of the six consortiums that adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries.

In terms of support to the development and implementation of research infrastructures (RIs), the United Kingdom's national roadmap on research infrastructures was replaced in 2012 by the RCUK's document "Investing for Growth: Capital Infrastructure for the 21st Century". It reflects changes to the United Kingdom's capital funding allocations. Funding for large facilities and infrastructure is available from the Research Councils, government departments, Regional Development Agencies, devolved administrations, charities, the private sector, the European Commission and other international bodies. A particular source of funding is the Large Facilities Capital Fund, which is administered by central government. A number of the facilities that appear in the ESFRI Roadmap also featured in the RCUK's Large Facilities Roadmap.

The 2012 RCUK Strategic Framework for Capital Investment outlines where capital investment is important so as to ensure sustainability of the research base in the medium to long term, including large facilities as previously described in the Large Facilities Roadmap and other significant capital priorities. In 2013, GBP 600 million was earmarked for funding the development of infrastructures and facilities. Finally, the Research Partnerships Investment Fund 2012-2015 supports large-scale projects that are able to leverage substantial co-investment from private sources in order to enhance the research facilities of higher education institutions undertaking world-leading research. It will secure GBP 1 billion investment in university research infrastructure. It has been extended until 2016-2017, providing at least GBP 100 million (circa EUR 125 million) of matched funding each year to leverage private investment in science infrastructure.

   3.2.   Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Access to the United Kingdom's research infrastructures is open to all UK and non-UK nationals who are registered as UK academics (in a UK HEI or Research Council Institute); postdoctoral researchers from UK universities; those applying via EU transnational access arrangements (the level of access is in accordance with agreed EU funding levels); overseas organisations that have contractual access agreements with the relevant facilities. In addition, applications from overseas (non-EU or without prior contractual access arrangement) are also considered.

4.   OPEN LABOUR MARKET FOR RESEARCHERS

   4.1.   Introduction to open labour market for researchers

A detailed report can be found in the country profile for United Kingdom in the Researchers’ Report 2014 [http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/United Kingdom_Country_Profile_RR2014_FINAL.pdf].

The following text provides an overview of the current situation and recent progress made in several key areas.

There were 251,358 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers in the United Kingdom in 2011. This represents 8.0 researchers per 1000 labour force compared with 7.6 among the Innovation Union reference group (Innovation Followers) and an EU average of 6.7.

   4.2.   Open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers

In 2013, the number of researcher posts advertised through the EURAXESS jobs portal per thousand researchers in the public sector was 54.8 in the United Kingdom, compared with 72.3 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 43.7.

In 2012, 78 % of university-based researchers were satisfied with the extent to which research job vacancies are publicly advertised and made known by their institution (More2 survey, 2012).

Higher education institutions in the United Kingdom are fully autonomous in designing and implementing their recruitment policy. They are required to publish all relevant policies on their websites. The procedure is time-consuming and costly, and as a result the advertising of posts is sometimes avoided. The United Kingdom's higher education (HE) funding bodies have encouraged action to face this challenge. For instance, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) encourages the institutions to have formal human resources strategies and provides funding to support these strategies under the Rewarding and Developing Staff in HE initiative. HEFCE also encourages institutions to develop recruitment and retention schemes.

   4.3.   Attractive careers

The European Charter & Code for Researchers is being implemented through both the Quality Assurance Agency and the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers. Vitae, which champions world-class support for researchers and research staff, leads in the implementation of the Concordat and assists higher institutions in the United Kingdom to exchange knowledge and good practices.  Vitae also supports them in gaining the European Commission’s Human Resources (HR) Excellence in Research Award.

By May 2014, 89 UK organisations had received the "HR Excellence in Research" logo for their progress in implementing the Charter & Code. The implementation of the Concordat is reviewed annually by the Concordat Strategy Group, and a report is also submitted to government.

   4.4.   Supporting structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The number of new doctoral graduates per thousand population aged 25-34 was 2.4 in 2011, compared with 1.6 among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 1.7.

All Research Councils in the United Kingdom concentrate their funding for doctoral training on the basis of quality. This is a result of funding constraints and the policy objective of improving the quality of doctoral training in the United Kingdom and striving for excellence. RCUK have developed a Statement of Expectations for Doctoral Training which lays out common principles for the support of all Research Council students. They are aligned with the seven principles for Innovative Doctoral Training.

Vitae, set up in 2008, works with the higher education sector to provide professional and career development for researchers and build international competitiveness through research, innovation and knowledge exchange. Vitae leads improvements in the employability and impact of researchers, so as to ensure that researchers are equipped to address research challenges and enhance the United Kingdom’s economic, social and cultural capital. The Vitae programme provides national leadership and strategic development, and works with higher education institutions, policy-makers, stakeholders, employers and individual researchers.

   4.5.   International and inter-sectoral mobility

In 2011, the percentage of doctoral candidates with citizenship of another EU Member State was 16.2 % in UK compared with 18.4 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 7.7 %. The percentage of non-EU doctoral candidates as a percentage of all doctoral candidates was 30.6 % in UK compared with 16.9 % among the Innovation Union reference group and an EU average of 24.2 %.

The UK National Action Plan on researcher mobility and careers within the European Research Area (ERA) (2009) points out that the United Kingdom's research base is already one of the most open in the world, both as regards recruitment of researchers and scientific collaborations (over 40 % of UK scientific papers now have one or more non-UK co-authors), and the UK government funds a number of dedicated fellowship schemes (Dorothy Hodgkin Fellowships, Newton International Fellowships) which seek to attract the best early-career researchers from around the world to UK institutions. Many Research Council fellowships have a strong international element because international collaboration is actively encouraged as part of the process of building an international reputation.

In the United Kingdom, there are many examples of partnerships between universities/research institutions and the business sector. The partnership could range from collaboration in co-design and co-delivery of postgraduate courses to co-funding, and joint supervision and mentoring of students. For example, the Collaborative Awards in Science and Engineering (CASE), sponsored by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) promote collaboration between the research community and the end-users of research. The award allows a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) student to spend 3-18 months with an industrial partner in a workplace outside the academic environment. The UK Research Councils Delivery Plan has as a national target the exchange of skills in the research base and encouraging movement of highly skilled people between the research base and user communities at all career stages.

5.   GENDER

   5.1.   Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

The UK has a clear legal framework on equality in place. Gender equality is enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, which provides a legislative framework to advance equality of opportunity for all. In addition to this, the Children and Families Act has created a system of flexible parental leave. The Athena Swan Charter is an incentive that fosters cultural changes to advance the representation of women in research performing organisations.   The country has through the implementation of the Concordat to support the career development of researchers, set out a principle that diversity and equality must be promoted in all respects of the recruitment and career management of researchers. The RCUK's Statement of Expectations for Equality and Diversity places expectations on universities receiving Research Council funding. The statement promotes and leads cultural change in relation to equalities and diversities, to engage staff at all levels, ensure researchers are trained and supported to address inequalities and to provide evidence of this.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || National level || 99.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting gender equality in research || EU level || 82.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 64 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 82.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample which have adopted Gender Equality Plans || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 7.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support national policies on gender equality in public research is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research performing organisations that have adopted Gender Equality Plans is higher than that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.

Employees in the United Kingdom have the right to return to the same job after maternity leave on the same terms and conditions or a similar job on terms and conditions at least as good. If the role has become redundant, employees should be offered a suitable alternative vacancy, otherwise, they may be entitled to redundancy pay. Cultural and institutional change is promoted by several measures. Research Council-funded students enjoy the right to receive six months’ maternity leave on full stipend and a further six months’ unpaid maternity leave; Research Council grants may be extended for up to 12 months to cover periods of maternity leave. Research Council fellowships cover maternity leave (as well as paternity leave, adoption leave, parental leave, extended jury service or paid sick leave) for a Research Fellow in line with the terms and conditions of the Fellow’s employment. The joint programme of the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering is aimed at understanding and addressing issues of diversity in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics workforce. The country supports the L’Oréal and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) ‘For Women in Science programme’ and co-funds the L’Oréal national fellowship programme. The Daphne Jackson Trust offers flexible paid fellowships with mentoring and retraining that help women and men to return to research after a career break of two or more years; this is sponsored by the Research Councils and many universities and other organisations. In May 2014, the United Kingdom government announced a call to action to get educators, industry and government to commit to boosting women’s participation in technology and engineering. In addition, a new publicity drive led by successful British entrepreneurs will be launched in September 2014 to change the way 14 to 16-year-olds think about science and technology, and to encourage more to pursue it as a career.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 53.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 77.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations implementing recruitment and promotion policies for female researchers is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

The Research Councils do not, at present, explicitly ask about the gender dimension in research content. However, peer review would consider the methodologies and appropriate ‘users’ of the research which may include the gender dimension in its decision making. This may explain the low values observed below at the funders level.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || National level || 0.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the inclusion of gender dimension in research content || EU level || 48.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 44 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 20.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support gender dimension in research content/programmes is lower than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations that include the gender dimension in research content is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   5.2.   Gender balance in the decision-making process

With regard to gender balance in decision-making, one of the key principles of the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers is that diversity and equality must be promoted in all aspects of the recruitment and careers management of researchers. Any university or research institute that is committed to the advancement and promotion of the careers of women in science, engineering and technology can apply for an Athena SWAN award. Recently the United Kingdom launched POWERful Women (PfW) – a new, professional initiative to showcase female leadership potential in the United Kingdom’s energy sector.

Various research institutions run mentoring schemes that are specially tailored towards the requirements of women in academia. In some cases, institution-wide networks of female academics and researchers have been set up. RCUK has reported that around 25 % of the Research Councils’ funding panel members are women.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 33.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 9.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.4 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || National level || 17.7 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations || EU level || 35.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of gender-balanced recruitment committees for leading researchers in research-performing organisations is lower than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

The share of gender-balanced research evaluation panels amongst responding research funding organisations in the United Kingdom is lower than the EU average.

6.   KNOWLEDGE CIRCULATION

   6.1.   Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

In terms of support to open access (OA), the government, in line with its overarching commitment to transparency and open data, is committed to ensuring that publicly funded research outcomes should be freely accessible. The United Kingdom's vision is for all users to be able to read published research papers in an electronic format and to search for and re-use (including download) the content of published research papers, both manually and using automated tools (such as those for text and data mining), provided that any such re-use is subject to full and proper attribution. In order to help the implementation of the policy, the Research Councils introduced in April 2013 a new funding mechanism: a block grant to universities and eligible research organisations to cover the cost of article processing charges (APCs).

Related to open access to publications, the United Kingdom is well advanced in its implementation, notably in relation to the governement’s preference for gold open access and acceptance of green open access with the appropriate embargo periods. The UK has an Open Access policy for both its grants based funding (research councils) and its institutional assessment based funding (the next Research Excellence Framework via HEFCE).

Compliance with the RCUK policy will be assessed as part of the first annual return that the university have to provide RCUK as part of the evidence that will be submitted to the independent review, who will report back in early 2015. A recent article in ResearchFortnight presented the finding that for universities who had received an RCUK OA Block grant and for those who did have some data, the compliance was in the 30 to 50% bracket. The MRC has had a OA mandate since 2006, and compliance even before the introduction of the RCUK policy was around 49%. The Wellcome Trust reports a compliance of around 67% in 2013. HEFCE funded research publications do not have a mandate for Open Access.

However, there are currently no way of reporting how many articles issued from UK research are available in Open Access. There is no data available for a comprehensive analysis to be made. The report for BIS “International comparative performance of the UK research base” (Elsevier, 2013) acknowledges that  relevant data is not available.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || National level || 99.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to publications || EU level || 51 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 18 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 16.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst responding research performing organisations || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support open access to publications is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of publicly funded scientific publications in OA amongst research performing organisations is similar to that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.

Concerning open access to data, the government has adopted the open data strategy (‘Open data by default’) and BIS has just updated its open data strategy. The “Research Sector Transparency Board”, chaired by the Minister, specifically addresses how to increase access to research data. The UK is also a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || National level || 96.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting open access to data || EU level || 33.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 54.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 74.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations making scientific research data available on-line and free of charge || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 8.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support open access to data is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA compliant cluster in United Kingdom, the share of research performing organisations making scientific research data systematically available online and free of charge publicly funded is higher than that within the EU's ERA compliant cluster.

In addition to institutional and subject repositories, the Gateway to research initiative provides information on Research Councils and Technology Strategy Board funded projects and, where available, links to research outputs such as publications.

   6.2.   Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

In relation to open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors, the Technology Strategy Board facilitates networking between the public and private sectors. For example, the Board supports the Knowledge Transfer Network, the Knowledge Transfer Partnerships, the nine Catapult Centres and the Biomedical Catalyst, the Innovative Vouchers, etc. Scotland launched in October 2013 the Single Knowledge Exchange Organisation (SKEO) under the banner ‘Innovation Scotland’. It continued supporting Interface, the free, national service which match-makes businesses with research resources in Scotland’s universities and research centres supporting the establishment of a number of Innovation Centres where businesses and universities can work together to drive innovation in and across Scotland’s key sectors (NRP 2014).

The UK’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is responsible for the intellectual property (IP) framework in the United Kingdom for patents, trademarks, designs and copyright. An effective and fair IP framework is essential to support the translation of the results of research into innovative products, processes and services. In addition, the Lambert toolkit for IP offers guidelines for universities and companies that wish to undertake collaborative research projects.

The National Centre for Universities and Business (NCUB) replaced the Council for Industry and Higher Education in 2013. It develops, promotes and supports world-class collaboration between universities and business across the United Kingdom. Research Councils operate Cooperative Awards for Science and Engineering which promote jointly supervised studentships between academic and private or other public sector actors. The UK Research Partnership Investment Fund is designed to support investment in higher education research facilities. The fund was originally set up in 2012. It is dedicated to supporting large-scale capital projects from HEIs with significant track records of research excellence, provided that they secure co-investment from businesses, charities or endowments (individual philanthropy). Northern Ireland has been developing Competence Centres. Scotland has launched the new framework for entrepreneurship and innovation in November 2013 called Scotland Can Do (NRP 2014).

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || National level || 99.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding funders supporting the implementation of knowledge transfer as part of its institutional and/or project-based funding || EU level || 82.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 6.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 4.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations' research and development budget financed by the private sector || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.6 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 75 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2.1 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 66.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 81.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 2.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 1.3 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in headcount) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

The share of research funders in the United Kingdom who responded to the survey and support KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction is higher than the EU average.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research performing organisations having funding originating from the private sector is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations having or using a structure for knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations having dedicated staff employed in knowledge transfer activities is higher than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research personnel whose primary occupation is in the private sector (in full time equivalents) is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.3.   Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

In relation to the implementation of Digital ERA, the United Kingdom has set up a strategy for its implementation, the Strategic Vision for UK e-Infrastructure, and allocated  GBP 165 million in 2011, supported by an additional GBP 189 million in 2012 to strengthen the United Kingdom’s e-infrastructure in collaboration with industry. The country has implemented a research and education network, essential for making digital services possible. The UK National Research and Education Network, Janet, is a specialised Internet service provider dedicated to supporting the needs of the research and education communities within the country. The UK government has set up the E-infrastructure Leadership Council (ELC) to advise on all aspects of e-infrastructure, including networks, data stores, computers, software and skills.

Concerning digital services, RCUK is developing its own complementary integrated set of priorities for e-infrastructure for research, and will work closely with the ELC to ensure linkage. Six areas are being tackled: Computer systems, software, data, skills, authentication and security, and networks.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 80.8 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 89.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, research collaboration platform, etc.) || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations providing digital research services (i.e. cloud services, a research collaboration platform, etc.) is higher than that within the EU ERA-compliant cluster.

   6.4.   Uptake of federated electronic identities

The United Kingdom is a member of eduGAIN, which it joined in May 2013. Jisc, representing UK universities, has launched the UK Access Management Federation for Education and Research, which provides a single solution to accessing online resources and services for education and research. RCUK is exploring the implications of electronic identity for researchers and is actively planning how to integrate the Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) with the RCUK grant systems.

Indicator || Level/cluster || Value || Year || Source

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (EU level) || 38.5 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || ERA compliant cluster (national level) || 24.2 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Share of responding research performing organisations in the sample providing federated electronic identities for their researchers || Limited compliance to ERA cluster (national level) || 0.9 % || 2013 || ERA survey 2014

Within the ERA-compliant cluster in the United Kingdom, the share of research-performing organisations providing federated electronic identities for their researchers is lower than that within the EU's ERA-compliant cluster.

7.   NOTES ON THE 2014 ERA SURVEY RESULTS

   7.1.   Comments

A total of 44 research performing organisations in United Kingdom answered the 2014 ERA survey, which represents 4.4% of the total number of researchers in the country (total number of researchers in the country as of 2011).

The principal component and clustering analysis of research performing organisations in United Kingdom shows that 51.3 % of them are in the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 35.9 % can be classified in the ‘limited compliance to ERA’ cluster and 12.8 % of organisations in the ‘ERA principles are not applicable’ cluster. However, when the organisations are weighted by the number of researchers in each organisation, the results significantly vary. Indeed, the shares of ‘weighted’ organisations are 91.8 % for the ‘ERA compliant’ cluster, 7.1 % for the ‘ERA limited compliant’ cluster and 1.0 % for those organisations where ERA principles are not applicable.

However, the results should be considered with caution, as a limited number of research performing organisations provided answers to the ERA survey, which did not include several important research performing organisations (large numbers of major universities and Research Council institutes) did not participate in the survey.

The relatively low results in terms of 'Share of research performing organisations which include the gender dimension in research content' in comparison with the EU average could reflect the fact that it is/may be taken into consideration in the design of the projects or as part of the peer review process and not as part of the organisation’s policy. Almost half of the respondents (notably directors and research managers) indicated that they do not know whether their programmes included the gender dimension or that it is not applicable to their cases.

The low 'share of publicly funded scientific publication in Open Access amongst research performing organisations' is possibly due to the absence of major research performing organisations among the respondents to the survey.

The low figures estimated for the indicators 'Share of funders which can base their project based research and development funding decisions on peer reviews carried out by non-national institutions' and 'Share of project based research and development budget allocated through peer review carried out by institutions outside the country' are explained by the fact that UKRC act as lead agencies and thus agencies in some other Member States use the results of the evaluations carried out by UKRC due to their quality and performance.

It should also be noted though that several important national funders and charities did not participate in the survey. Results presented for indicators reflecting the implementation of ERA by funders represent 27 % of total GBAORD in the UK.

Policy measures in support of ERA implementation

Initiative || Adopted in || Adopted since 2012 || New measure since 2013

Research and innovation system

New strategy for research and innovation || 2014 || X || X

Project-based funding applying the core principles of international peer review

Research Councils grants and support || || ||

UK Higher Education Funding Bodies Research Councils || || ||

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth || 2011 || ||

UK Higher Education Funding Bodies || || ||

Implementing joint research agendas

Joint Programming Initiatives || 2008 || ||

ERA-nets || || ||

Open Research Area in Europe for the Social Sciences (ORA) || 2009 || ||

Several bi-lateral science and technology agreements with third countries || || ||

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Money follows Researcher scheme || || ||

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national and regional research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Extension of the Research Partnership Investment Fund || 2013 || X || X

Investing for Growth: Capital Infrastructure for the 21st Century || 2012 || X ||

Research Partnerships Investment Fund 2012-2015 || 2012 || X ||

Budget 2013 || 2013 || X || X

Large Facilities Capital Fund || 2002 || ||

RCUK Strategic Framework for Capital Investment || 2012 || X ||

Access to research infrastructures of pan-European interest

UK research infrastructures || || ||

Attractive careers

The Concordat to Support the Career development of Researchers || 2008 || ||

EURAXESS-UK || 2011 || ||

Terms and Conditions of Research Council Training Grants || || ||

Private pension agreements for researchers || || ||

Tier 5 (Temporary worker - government authorised exchange) || 2013 || X || X

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Athena Swan Charter || 2005 || ||

Gender balance in the decision-making process

Royal Society and Royal Academy of engineering joint programme to tackle diversity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) National academies and their academic fellowships RCUK PhD and fellowship awards STEMNET and STEM Ambassadors || || ||

RCUK Statement of Expectations for Equality and Diversity || 2013 || X || X

Equality Act 2010 || 2010 || ||

Children and Families Bill || 2013 || X || X

Public Sector Equality Duty || || ||

Research Excellence Framework Equality and Diversity Panel || 2010 || ||

Open access to publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

RCUK Policy on Open Access || 2013 || X || X

National Reform Programme || 2013 || X || X

Gateway to Research || 2012 || X ||

Research Councils Repositories || || ||

            UK Open Data Policy || 2012 || X ||

BIS Open Data Policy || 2014 || X || X

Research Sector Transparency Board || 2013 || X || X

            HEFCE Open Access Policy || 2013 || X || X

Open innovation and knowledge transfer between public and private sectors

UK Intellectual Property Office initiative || || ||

National Centre for Universities and Business (NCUB) || 2013 || X || X

Higher Education Innovation Fund UK Research Partnership Investment Fund National Centre for Universities and Business || || ||

Smart Cymru: R&D and innovation grant support to business || 2012 || X ||

Catapult Centres || 2011 || ||

Cooperative Awards for Science and Engineering (CASE) || 1994 || ||

Knowledge Transfer Partnerships || 1975 || ||

Knowledge Transfer Networks || 2004 || ||

Technology Strategy Board Concept to Commercialisation || 2011 || ||

TSB/Research Council Catalyst Funds || 2011 || ||

Collaborative R&D || 2011 || ||

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

E-infrastructure Leadership Council || 2012 || X ||

UK e-Science Programme || 2002 || ||

Uptake of federated electronic identities

Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) || 2012 || X ||

eduGAIN || || ||

Iceland

Priority: More effective national systems

Research and Innovation structure

The main legal framework for the research and innovation system in Iceland is found in acts no. 2/2003 on the Science and Technology Policy Council, no. 3/2003 on Government Support for Scientific Research and no. 75/2007 on Government Support for Technology, Research and Industry Development.

The Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC), headed by the prime minister, is the body in charge of R&D policy at a strategic level. The STPC currently includes six of the government nine ministers as well as representatives appointed by the ministries, higher education institutions and industry and labour organizations. Two working committees, the Science Committee and the Technology Committee operate under the STPC and its secretariat is divided between the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture and the Ministry of Industries and Innovation. The role of the STPC is to define the strategic orientations for STI development policy in Iceland. The primary instruments for supporting the policy are the three main competitive funds: the Research Fund, the Technology Development Fund and the Infrastructure Fund.

Two institutions are central in providing service and support to the research and innovation community in Iceland: The Icelandic Centre for Research (Rannís) and Innovation Center Iceland. Rannís reports to the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. Rannís provides support to the research and innovation community. It administers competitive funds and strategic research programmes, coordinates and promotes Icelandic participation in collaborative international projects in science and technology, monitors resources and performance in R&D and promotes public awareness of research and innovation in Iceland. The Innovation Center Iceland, which operates under the auspices of the Mininstry of Industries and Innovation, encourages innovation and promotes the advancement of new ideas in the Icelandic economy by providing active participation and support to entrepreneurs and businesses. It acts as an intermediary between individual entrepreneurs, companies and public agencies and operates an incubation center.

National strategy for Research and Innovation

The national STI policy is developed by the STPC. The ministries, which are largely independent and autonomous, are responsible for operationalizing the policy. The current policy (2014-2016) was adopted in November 2013 and has been followed up with an Action Plan (http://www.forsaetisraduneyti.is/vt/). The focus of the policy is fourfold: to increase recruitment in research and innovation; to strengthen collaboration between higher education institutions, research institutions and companies; to increase funding and investment in research and innovation; and to strengthen the evaluation of the quality and impact of research and innovation. Furthermore, the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture is currently preparing a new roadmap for research infrastructures.

Research and Innovation funding

In recent years, competitive funds have accounted for between 15 per cent and 20 per cent of the total public investment in research and innovation. One of the aims of the STPC Policy Action Plan is to increase the proportion of competitive funding in the system to 27 per cent of the total public funding by 2016.

The four main public competitive funds in Iceland are the Icelandic Research Fund, the Infrastructure Fund, the Strategic Research Programme, and the Technology Development Fund.[1] Several smaller public funds exist, some of which are directed at specific industries, such as the Added Value for Seafood Research Programme Fund (AVS) and the Fisheries’ Project Fund (see Table 1).

In the years following the economic collapse (2009-2011), contributions to the Technology Development Fund decreased somewhat while the Research Fund remained relatively stable. In 2013 both funds were increased considerably. In 2014 they decreased from the 2013 level, but remain well above their 2012 level in both real and nominal value.

The Strategic Research Programme was established over a decade ago with the aim of stimulating research and development in strategically chosen areas. The scheme was seen as supplementary to the two other funds that are open. The fund has been one of the most important schemes in promoting collaboration between companies, research institutes and higher education institutes.

Table 1: Public investment in competitive funds 2009-2014. MISK, real value.*

|| 2009 || 2010 || 2011 || 2012 || 2013 || 2014**

The Technology Development Fund || 807 || 1.037 || 782 || 830 || 1,309 || 983

The Research Fund || 983 || 982 || 907 || 819 || 1,351 || 1,185

The Graduate Student Fund*** || 120 || 115 || 103 || 103 || 98 || -

The Strategic Research Programme for Science and Technology || 394 || 491 || 267 || 208 || 406 || 193

The Infrastructure Fund || 405 || 184 || 174 || 225 || 110 || 106

Total, main competitive funds || 2,709 || 2,809 || 2,233 || 2,185 || 3,274 || 2,467

|| || || || || ||

Research Fund for Increased Value in Fisheries || 414 || 249 || 449 || 304 || 257 || 164

Other research and development funds || 182 || 172 || 687 || 675 || 210 || 100

|| || || || || ||

Tax reduction scheme**** || || || 614 || 818 || 1,139 || 1,084

Total || 3,184 || 3,114 || 3,879 || 3,879 || 4,781 || 3,814

Source: Rannís.

*Original sources: Government accounts for 2009-2012, the national budget for 2014.

** The 2014 prices are based on prices in the 2014 draft budget.

*** The Research Fund for Graduate Students was merged with the Research Fund in 2013.

****Established in 2009. Refunding first took place in 2011.

A tax reduction scheme came into effect in 2011, which enabled companies to receive a refund of up to 20 per cent of R&D costs. Public contribution to the scheme has increased considerably since its implementation (Table 1). The STPC policy calls for a considerable increase in private investments in R&D in 2015-2016. If Iceland is to achieve the new policy’s goal of reaching 3 per cent in R&D expenditure by 2016,[2] it has been estimated that the required additional investment in 2015 and 2016 amounts to approximately 8 billion ISK. Of this amount 2.8 billion ISK represents an increase to the public funds. The rest is foreseen to come from private companies.

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Over 80 per cent of the public contribution to R&D is in the form of block grants allocated directly to institutions. The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture has signed five year contracts (2012-2016) with all universities in Iceland (public and private). The contracts, which include performance indicators, are reviewed and monitored annually. The ministry has also signed three years contracts with knowledge centres and performance contracts with two research institutions.

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

International cooperation is vital for the development of research and innovation in Iceland. Iceland has been participating in European programmes in the fields of education and research since 1994.

Implement joint research agendas Framework Programme

Currently Iceland is participating in the JPI on healthy and productive seas and oceans. Iceland is also an active partner in nine ERA-NETs (M-Era, Neuron II, Era SysApp, EuroNanoMed II, HERA, NORFACE, SEAS-ERA, Era Marine BioTech, Era Geothermal, Cofasp).

Iceland participates in a number of ERA-Net projects some of which have the objective of becoming established Article 185 initiatives in the future. Eurostars has been running as an Article 185 initiative since 2008, with Icelandic participation from the start. Iceland has not had an official policy towards participation in Article 187 initiatives. However, Icelandic organisations participate in Innovative Medicines and Hydrogen and Fuel Cells initiatives. Iceland is a member of EUREKA, COST and ESPON.

Other joint research agendas

Iceland is part of the NORIA, the Nordic Research and Innovation Area, which is responsible for the Nordic R&D cooperation in the fields of research and innovation. This involves Nordic research funding institutions, fixed-term research programmes, Nordic Centres of Excellence, the Top-level Research Initiative (the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative to involve the very best agencies and institutions in the Nordic region, and promote research and innovation), grant schemes, and the coordination and planning of major infrastructure investments among the Nordic countries.

A strategic document on Iceland’s participation in joint programming initiatives and other international programs is still to be developed.

Openness of Member State/Associated Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation

For a small country like Iceland, international cooperation is extremely important and many international researchers collaborate extensively with researchers overseas. Iceland has signed a number of bilateral agreements with third countries such as the US, China and India.

Common funding principles to make national research programmes compatible, interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers.

According to the STPC Policy Action Plan, the regulations for funding, including definitions of eligible costs, are to be changed in order to coordinate with international regulations, in particular Horizon 2020.

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

Iceland participates in joint programming initiatives where there is mutual peer review recognition. Furthermore, the board of the Technology Development Fund may, in some cases, recognize international peer-review as a part of its procedures. However, due to legal restrictions, the Research Fund does not accept international peer-review. The STPC Policy Action Plans aim to revise the legal framework of the Research Fund and address the issue of recognizing international peer-review in that process.

Priority: Research Infrastructures

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Iceland has participated in the preparatory phases of several ESFRI infrastructures. Iceland does not currently have a national strategy on financial commitments in ESFRI, but a new Roadmap is expected in 2015.

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

According to the legal framework for higher education institutions (act. 63/2006), the recruitment and selection of researchers in HEIs should be transparent and merit based. Apart from these general principles, the boards of the higher education institutions have autonomy to set recruitment strategies for their institutions. The largest university, the University of Iceland has recently experimented with advertising for open positions, where the aim is to recruit excellent researchers in any field rather than specifying the field or the research area. The method has proven to be successful for attracting high-level international researchers to the University.

There are no formal barriers to recruiting non-nationals for permanent research and academic positions. On EURAXESS Iceland, foreign researchers can access information on vacant positions in Icelandic universities and research institutions as well as companies. All Icelandic universities have signed the European charter for researchers and the code of conducts for their recruitment.

The STPC Policy Action Plan includes actions to encourage the rapid handling of work permit applications for researchers outside the EU in order to facilitate international recruitment in private companies and universities in Iceland.

Researchers careers

There is a strong tradition in Iceland for seeking doctoral education overseas. However, in recent years, the possibilities of pursuing doctoral training within Icelandic institutions have increased. Three universities are accredited to award doctoral degrees: the University of Iceland, the Agricultural University (in collaboration with the University of Iceland) and the University of Reykjavík. Of these, the University of Iceland is by far the largest. In the years 2000-2003 there were on average six doctoral graduates per year from the University of Iceland, but in the past four years (2010-2013) this number has increased to 44 PhDs per year on average.

The aim of the STPC Policy Action Plan is the continued development of doctoral training in Iceland. The Plan’s aim is that by 2016, 200 doctoral students will be fully funded in Iceland. This is to be achieved through a increase in competitive funding. Moreover, a Strategic Research Programme specifically aimed at strengthening the recruitment of young researchers, is to be launched in 2015. Furthermore, the Action Plan includes actions to increase the participation of private companies in doctoral training.

One of the challenges in Iceland has been to offer an attractive research environment to early career researchers. The University of Iceland is currently addressing this issue by increasing the number of post-doc positions at the institution.

Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

The legal framework of the Research Fund prohibits cross-border funding flows. However, in order to increase Iceland’s participation in international programs, the STPC Policy Action Plan includes a re-examination of the law as one of its actions. The other large competitive fund, the Technology Development Fund, has not dealt with the same restrictions as the Research Fund and has thus been able to fund researchers outside Iceland.

Support structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The STPC Policy Action Plan aims to increase research collaboration between higher education institutions, research institutions and private companies, including collaboration on doctoral training. As a part of this a Strategic Research Programme on recruitment to research and innovation will be launched in 2015. The Research Programme will aim to increase graduates in natural science and technology, but Iceland is currently below the EU average in tertiary education graduates in these fields.

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

Iceland has had a special statute intended to ensure equality between women and men and their equal status in all respects since 1976. The current Gender Equality Act dates from 2008.[3] There are no specific acts regulating gender equality in public research. However, in some cases individual higher education institutions have formed strategies specifically aimed at promoting equal rights in research.

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender National policies on gender equality in public research

The Gender Equality Act stipulates that all enterprises and institutions with more than 25 employees, on average over the year, shall set themselves a gender equality programme or mainstream gender equality perspectives into their personnel policy. This applies to research performing organizations and higher education institutions. These gender equality programmes and gender equality perspectives in personnel policies shall be reviewed at three-year intervals.

According to a recent report on gender equality in higher education in Iceland[4]  the current status of addressing gender issues is different in the seven higher education institutions in Iceland. Many positive developments have taken place in recent years and all HEIs have gender equality plans for students and staff. Moreover, almost all HEIs have an equality board or council which supervises the gender equality action plan. In addition most HEIs have a gender equality officer. The HEIs in Iceland have similar concerns when it comes to gender equality in higher education:

· gender balance in certain study areas,

· high drop-out rates of male students,

· future prospects of female graduates,

· lack of time for gender equality work,

· lack of time to execute the gender action plans,

· increase cooperation between universities needed, and

· to have a broader definition of gender equality.

The Centre for Women´s and Gender Studies (RIKK) was founded at the University of Iceland in 1991. It has been instrumental in coordinating and organizing women's studies in Iceland. The Centre supports women´s studies at academic level, publishes research on gender issues, orchestrates a lecture series and seminars during the academic year and provides an information service. The centre co-ordinates research projects on various subjects in the fields of sociology, gender research, anthropology etc. It participates in several Nordic and European projects and is now taking part in running several national projects. The centre also oversees Edda – Center for Excellence established in 2009 and GEST – The Gender Equality Studies and Training Programme.

The University of Iceland has offered Gender Studies programme since 1996, for undergraduate, graduate and PhD students. The programme is now part of the Faculty of Political Science, but in addition many courses are available in other faculties. The programme focuses on providing students with broad and multidisciplinary perspectives. In addition the objective is to provide critical knowledge and expertise in the practical implementation of gender equality principles.

Careers – Working conditions in public research

In 2012 the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture took part in a Nordic project on gender balance in academia. The aim of the project was to compare the developments in gender equality legislation, statistics and policy in the Nordic countries and find good examples of successful instruments and measures that have improved the gender balance in academia in these countries.[5]

Gender balance in decision making process

The current Gender Equality Act aims to establish and maintain equal status and equal opportunities for women and men, and thus promote gender equality in all spheres of society. It introduces a minimum quota of 40 per cent women in governmental (state and municipal) committees and councils, if the body consists of more than three members and gender mainstreaming is institutionalized.

Since 2008 the Centre for Gender Equality has been working on a project called Side by Side, a gender-mainstreaming project funded by the EU Progress Programme. The aim of the project is to implement and develop gender mainstreaming in national policies and activities in Iceland.

Furthermore, since 2009 there has been a focus on gender responsive budgeting in Iceland and this is reflected in a recent parliamentary resolution on a four year gender equality action programme 2011-2014. Funds and public support for scientific research should include provisions to systematically collect information on the gender composition of expert councils, applicants and grantees, and grant amounts. If an uneven distribution is found between the grantees of either gender they should examine whether action should be taken to correct this inequality, for example, by making grant applications more accessible, or reviewing the allocation rules.

Other recent and current activities in this area include:

· a study on gender balance in all research and innovation funds,

· a study on gender balance in universities, and

· a feasibility study on implementing a gender equality prize for universities.

Priority: Knowledge circulation

Open access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

According to Act no. 3/2003 with later amendments regarding public funding of scientific research, the results of research funded by the public funds should be published in open access fora unless otherwise agreed. All grantees of the competitive funds administered by Rannís are encouraged to publish in open access journals.

The STPC Policy Action Plan aims at establishing a working group on research infrastructures in 2014. One of the tasks of the working group is to address the question of open access to data gathered through regular monitoring and research in public research institutions.

Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

Knowledge transfer is actively being promoted by the Research Liaison Office of the University of Iceland.

Since 2009, the Strategic Research Programme for Centres of Excellence and Research Clusters (Markáætlun um öndvegissetur og klasa) has emphasized the collaboration of higher education institutions, public research institutes and businesses. Currently there are a small number of cooperation fora within certain research fields, driven by this program, focusing on geothermal energy, artificial intelligence, and studies in equality and diversity.

Policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

There are open repositories maintained by Landspitali University Hospital and the National and University library, and a national synchronized repository (CRIS based on CERIF) is being planned in 2013/14.

Iceland has developed the Iceland Consortia (IC) for electronic subscriptions, hosted by the National and University library. The aim of the IC is to secure access to academic and scholarly content for students and staff of academic and research institutions and the general public in Iceland. Current licenses include e-journals, databases, citations databases and encyclopaedias. It serves academics and research institutions as well as every computer in the country that is connected to the Internet through an Icelandic Internet Service Provider (ISP).

Montenegro

Priority: More effective national systems

Research and Innovation structure

The Ministry of Science (MoS), which was created in December 2010 (previously organized as a department within Ministry of Education), as the main public administrative body implementing research and development policy (through national and international programmes of public interest), negotiates and implements bilateral scientific and technology (S&T) cooperation agreements, concludes memorandums, protocols and programmes of collaboration with ministries and foreign organizations. CSRA prepares and proposes R&D strategies to the Government, monitors implementation of the strategies, gives expert proposals and has an advisory role.

The research community is made of 46 licensed scientific research institutions, out of which 32 faculties (public and private), eight institutes (public and private) and six other scientific research institutions. 2,303 professionals are employed in the R&D sector3, which accounts for 0.8% of the total labour force.

National strategy for Research and Innovation

Montenegro published a Strategy for science and research (Strategija naučno-istraživačke djelatnosti Crne Gore (2008-2016), which covers an eight year period and describes the strategic importance of science and research for the economic and social development of Montenegro. The strategy covers areas of research, innovation and technological development, as well as international cooperation.

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review Project-based funding in the country

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review is implemented for the national scientific research projects for the cycle 2012-2015. The call was open for the licensed scientific research institutions in Montenegro; 198 proposals were submitted and have been evaluated by thematic panels of independent international experts (two evaluators per project). The evaluations involved 420 international independent experts. The success rate was 52,50%. After the first research year, all research teams submitted their reports on the implementation as well as the research plan for the second year.

One of the initiatives that provide research grants on a project basis is the Higher Education and Research for Innovation and Competitiveness Project – HERIC. The objective of HERIC is to strengthen the quality and relevance of higher education and research in Montenegro through reforming the higher education finance and quality assurance systems and by strengthening research and development capabilities. The Ministry of Science, within the HERIC initiative has realized activities on the establishment of the first Centre of Excellence and large collaborative research grants, both through the calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review.

The Ministry of Science published the call for the establishment of the first Centre of Excellence in Montenegro, on May 30th 2013. A total of 10 research institutions applied. At the end of December 2013, a two-stage application evaluation process, conducted by foreign experts, was completed. Each application that met eligibility, administrative and environmental compliance criteria was remotely evaluated by two independent and unbiased International Scientific Peer Reviewers (ISPRs). The individual evaluation reports, prepared by the ISPRs, was examined and discussed by the Final Evaluation Committee composed of three unbiased International Project Implementation Experts (IPIEs) responsible for carrying out the final evaluation.

On May 20th 2014, the Ministry of Science published the second call for research grants with the deadline for submission on September 19th 2014. The same process of evaluation, as for the first call for research grants, will be applied.

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Through the HERIC project, the Study on Research Equipment and Creation of Joint Research Area that presents the state of available equipment in 29 licensed research institutions in Montenegro, both public and private, was completed in November 2013. The licensed research institutions were selected based on priority research fields in which the Centre of Excellence and large research grants will be funded, but also according to the capacities of institutions. The Study on Scientific Equipment and Creation of Joint Research Area presents an overview of the existing equipment in research institutions, highlighting the necessity to purchase new equipment that would be used jointly by several institutions from the same field of research.

The study was taken into consideration during the process of determining which equipment should be financed, both for the Centre of Excellence and large collaborative research grants.

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

Implement joint research agendas Joint research

Participation in research programmes

Montenegro participated in the Framework Programmes of the European Community (FP5, FP6 and first year of the FP7 programme) as a third country.

Based on the Memorandum of Understanding, as of January 25th, 2008, Montenegro participated as an associated country to the FP7 Programme. A network of National Contact Points (NCP) was established and coordinated by the Ministry of Science. In addition to this network, administrative capacity included the appointed members of Programme Committees, altogether composing the structure that provided support in disseminating information, searching for adequate partners, preparing and proposing projects for FP7.

Montenegro participated in 34 projects under the FP7 Programme, with a success rate of 19.48%.

FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Participation in new Research and Innovation Framework Programme - Horizon 2020 (2014–2020)

Taking into account the positive experience gained through participation in the EU Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities - FP7, and according to the strategic goal of the Ministry of Science to provide continuity in supporting the scientific research community in Montenegro at international level, the Ministry of Science expressed its interest for Montenegro’s association to the new EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 (2014-2020), in January 2013.

On July 30th 2013, the Ministry of Science established the network of National Contact Points (NCP) for Horizon 2020, in accordance with the "Minimum standards and guiding principles", and appointed the members of Montenegro in the Programme Committees for Horizon 2020, on February 25th 2014, consisting of the representatives from the Ministry of Science, as well as from the academic community and the business sector. The appointed NCPs, participated in programme training in 2013/2014.

The Government of Montenegro, on May 29th 2014, adopted the International Agreement between the European Union and Montenegro on the participation of Montenegro in the Union programme Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020). Montenegro joined the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation – Horizon 2020 on July 01st 2014.

Participation in the Seventh Euratom Framework Programme

Montenegro has not participated in projects concerning nuclear research area within the EURATOM Framework Programme FP7. In the forthcoming period, consultations will be held with the scientific research community in order to define priorities and future activities within the FP7 EURATOM. This is done in consideration of Montenegro’s declaration as a non-nuclear country, its available research and financial capacities, and programmes successfully implemented thus far in the framework of cooperation between Montenegro and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Montenegro is a member of the IAEA since 2006.

On June 19th 2014, the Government of Montenegro adopted the Country Programme Framework (CPF) on cooperation between Montenegro and the International Atomic Energy Agency, 2014-2020.

In 2013, Montenegro initiated cooperation with the Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications in order to provide opportunities to the Montenegrin scientific-research community to use the Department's programmes and projects.

Montenegro’s involvement in the IAEA in 2006 resulted in 10 national projects and further participation in 76 regional projects.

Since 2012, Montenegro completed four national projects, 43 regional projects and one interregional project.

For the project cycle 2016-2017, three national projects were submitted to IAEA.

i. Joint programming initiatives

Montenegro recognized the importance of preparing for participation in joint programming initiatives in research.

Firstly, the Ministry of Science realized the Joint Call for co-financing national scientific research projects (2012-2015) of basic, applied and development research, which are in line with the Strategy for Scientific Research Activities and 10 priority areas in research.

Montenegro participated in the SEE-ERA.NET project to network research institutions in 14 Western Balkans countries and EU Member States, which was successfully funded under the FP6 programme. Research teams from Montenegro participated in six out of the 34 projects which were implemented in the period from 2007 to 2009. Research teams from Montenegro participated in six projects across the following thematic areas: Food, Agriculture and Biotechnology, Information and Communication Technologies and Environment including Climate Change.

The SEE-ERA.NET PLUS project was also implemented under the 7thFP, and research teams from Montenegro participated in three projects across the following thematic areas: AgroFood and Information and Communication Technologies, from 2010 to 2012.

Other joint research agendas

Montenegro participated in three SEE-ERA.NET Plus networks, namely South East Europe ERA-NET from 2004-2009, South East European Research Area for e-Infrastructures in the period of 2009-2012, and lastly South East European ERA-NET Plus: Joint call for European Research projects in September 2009 in order to enhance the integration of the Western Balkan Countries into the European Research Area, which lasted from 2009 to 2013.

Openness of Member State/Associated Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation

International cooperation in science and research is realized through various programmes for science and research funding.

Montenegro has developed wide multilateral cooperation in the areas of science and technology by participating in the following programmes and organizations: EUREKA, European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST), NATO “Science for Peace and Security Programme”, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Montenegro is a member of the EUREKA programme since 22nd June 2012, when the Memorandum was signed, and participates in three projects. These are:

· ELDORO (Electronic Doctor’s Round) – improvement of the flow of information in hospitals and clinics through the use of modern communication technologies of the Company MG Soft (total amount: EUR 3,58 million) 

· WINEREST (Sustainable and innovative use of waste from grape and fruit processing) – finding technology and introducing into production the economically viable and environmentally safe use of waste from the process of producing wine and fruit juices, Company “13. jul Plantaže” (total amount: EUR 0,6 million)

· LEADOC - (Longterm Archiving of Electronic Documents in the Cloud) - the project addresses the security and validity of electronic documents from the prospective of long term archiving using cloud computing. Special attention is given to safe and secure mobile access to the documents archived in trusted electronic cloud storage (total amount: EUR 1,33 million).

From 2012, Montenegrin institutions are implementing the following projects:

· Improvements in the Harmonized Seismic Hazard Maps for the Western Balkan Countries, 2012/15.

· Increasing the clearance capacity for unexploded ordnance in Montenegro, 2014/17.

Since gaining independence in May 2006, the Government of Montenegro concluded agreements on scientific and technological cooperation with 13 countries.

Bilateral S&T cooperation is based on agreements and realized through joint calls for co-financing scientific and technological cooperation. In the last two years Montenegro signed the following agreements on scientific and technological cooperation:

· Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation with Hungary, on September 25th, 2012, in Podgorica;

· Agreement between Montenegro and the Republic of Poland on Culture, Education and Science was signed on October 26th, 2012, in Warsaw, Poland.

· Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation with the Republic of Turkey and Protocol on Cooperation between the Ministry of Science and TÜBİTAK, on April 12th, 2013, in Ankara;

· Agreement between the Ministry of Science and National Research Council (CNR) of the Republic of Italy, followed by the Programme of  scientific cooperation, on July 04th, 2013, in Podgorica; and

· Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation with the Republic of Italy, on September 26th, 2013, in Podgorica.

Cross border cooperation is strengthened trough pre-accession IPA II funds.

With a view to encouraging more intensive scientific and technological cooperation, Montenegro will make efforts to strengthen its institutional, administrative and financial capacities in the forthcoming period, through the EC’s technical assistance programmes, cooperation with the EU member states and use of pre-accession funds.

Strengthening international co-operation in RDI is of great importance for fulfilling the following goals: integration of the Montenegrin research community in ERA and ensuring its greater participation in the programmes of the European Union and other international programmes.

Common funding principles to make national research programmes compatible, interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers

National scientific research projects are          implemented through public calls open to licensed scientific research institutions. Definition of priorities in the calls and eligibility criteria are set by the Ministry of Science, based on a suggestion from the Council for Scientific Research Activities, and with prior stakeholder consultation. The call for national scientific research projects for the project cycle 2012-2015 was open for licensed scientific research institutions (as a lead applicant). The chosen institution conducts research in 10 priority research areas, which are in line with the EU priorities. In this way, international researchers can be involved in research activities in Montenegro. One of the main evaluation criteria for national projects was multilateral networking and regional linking, while for the Centre of Excellence and large research grants international cooperation was the obligatory criterion. Therefore, the international researchers are engaged in 85 national projects for the cycle 2012-2015 and in all research grants, as well as in the Centre of Excellence. Also, through bilateral projects, COST Actions and the EUREKA programme, the Ministry supports projects that Montenegrin researchers conduct with the international partners.

Priority: Research Infrastructures

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest Participation in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap

The main objective of the Roadmap infrastructure is to define and present the priorities of Montenegro in the field of research infrastructures. With its content, the Roadmap will be complementary to the Strategy for Scientific Research Activities of Montenegro for the period 2012-2016, and will represent the implementation document in this area. The roadmap should serve as the basis for governmental bodies and infrastructure. One of its important functions is to provide a comprehensive overview of the current and planned activities at the state level, especially those related to the field of research infrastructure, their synergy and effective distribution of available funds. The document provides a certain level of predictability and understanding of state plans as well as monitoring the implementation of public policies and objectives in the field of research infrastructures. The document is not legally binding, and the dynamic and scope of implementing goals will vary from year to year and depend on the availability of funds in the state budget and the overall condition of the financial sector.

The abovementioned methodology includes:

· The number of potential researchers in a particular field and the possibility of hiring new researchers;

· The impact on the economy, particularly the benefits of potential participation of Montenegrin companies in developing research infrastructure, the impact on the industry and the potential to create spin-off companies;

· The importance of knowledge development in Montenegro, development of interdisciplinary research, and possibility of the use of modern equipment;

· The importance for society (improvement of living conditions, social challenges, promotion of science and development of scientific talents...);  and

· The financial aspect ratio that includes investment and realized benefits.

The RI roadmap was prepared and sent for review to the licensed scientific research institutions in Montenegro. It should be completed by the end of September and presented at the next ESFRI meeting.

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

Montenegro is constantly developing its mobility opportunities which would give the chance for Montenegrin researchers to work in research centres and institutes abroad, as well as invite foreign researchers to work in Montenegrin scientific research institutions. In this way, Montenegrin and foreign researchers are able to conduct joint research through the use of technology and modern laboratories, sharing knowledge and experience through joint scientific research projects, as well as the possibility of professional development of young researchers engaged in projects. This opportunity is enabled through national research projects wherein one of the most important evaluation criteria is the support of researchers’ mobility as well as the possibility for PhD students whose mentors are from abroad to realize part of their research in the institutions of their mentors. Moreover, through the first Centre of Excellence, one area of evaluation was international cooperation and mobility of researchers, as well as for large collaborative research grants.

Mobility of researchers is realised through bilateral scientific and technological (S&T) cooperation that Montenegro has with seven countries.

Through multilateral S&T cooperation, Montenegro enables mobility of researchers through FP7, COST, IPA IV, EUREKA and JRC, as well as through new the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 (2014-2020).

Furthermore, particular attention is devoted to increasing visibility of the scientific activities and to mobility opportunities to the public, through continuous support of the Ministry of Science, the Ministry of Education and the University’s web portal, as well as EURAXESS Montenegro portal. The EURAXESS portal contains four main pillars, all devoted to researcher mobility: jobs, services, rights for researchers and links. Montenegro encourages the implementation of the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers. All three universities in Montenegro are signatories to the Charter and the Code.

Researchers careers

The Ministry of Science has been providing support to young researchers through the engagement of young researchers in national scientific research projects for a period of three years, with the obligation to defend the master or doctoral thesis. The call for co-financing national scientific research projects has given priority to projects in which young researchers are engaged. The Centre of Excellence and large research grants also provide the possibility for engaging young researchers as well as their full employment during the project’s lifetime.

Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

Bilateral cooperation is implemented through co-financing of joint research projects, already financed as national projects, in the form of mutual visits (costs of travel and subsistence) for researchers from Montenegro and the partner countries, which will perform joint research projects.

Costs related to the exchange of researchers are reimbursed in the following way:

· The party hosting a researcher covers the costs of accommodation and subsistence,

· The party sending a researcher covers the costs of travel between the sites of cooperating institutions.

The call for financing bilateral projects is open for holders (research institutes and faculties) of a current national research project grant from the Ministry of Science of Montenegro.

One of the main criteria for all research programmes that the Ministry finances is international cooperation. Therefore, one of the evaluation criteria for national programmes was multilateral networking and regional linking. This was an obligatory criterion for the Centre of Excellence and large research grants as well. Therefore, the international institutions have access to national grants for activities such as: costs for researchers from an international partner’s institution engaged to exchange experience, teach and conduct research under the project; and costs for travel expenses – including travel costs, accommodation and subsistence. Also, through the EUREKA programme, the Ministry supports projects that Montenegrin companies conducted with international partners.

Support to structured innovative doctoral training programmes

Montenegro supports doctoral training programmes through several measures. As mentioned, through national research projects, Ministry of Science supports the engagement of PhD students in scientific institutions, for a three-year period, as well as through the Centre of Excellence and large research grants. Also, through an annual call on co-financing scientific research activities, the Ministry of Science financially supports PhD studies after finishing the doctoral thesis.

Doctoral training programmes are additionally supported through the Higher Education and Research for Innovation and Competiveness Project – HERIC, through Promoting a Scholarship Program for Master’s, PhD and Postdoctoral Studies, while the Ministry of Science supports PhD and Postdoctoral Studies and the Ministry of Education supports master studies. It will be the first time that the country has committed such a large amount for scholarships to support students and researchers. The PhD scheme will fund students who are already in a full-time PhD programme in Montenegro or employed in Montenegro and in a fulltime PhD programme abroad. This scheme will support periods between six months and two years abroad to gain international expertise particularly that which cannot be obtained in Montenegro as part of the PhD programme. The students will return to Montenegro to complete their doctoral theses.

The programme will also help build national capacity for participation in the EU Horizon 2020 programme. The entire structure of the scheme, and especially the evaluation procedure, is modelled by Horizon 2020. This will give students and researchers invaluable experience in applying for funding modelled on that of the Marie Sklodowska Curie fellowship scheme. This will certainly give an advantage to national students and researchers if they decide to apply for European funding in the future.

The Scholarship Scheme is being finalised and the final draft is expected by September 2014.

Support mobility between private and public sector

Montenegro supports mobility between the private and public sectors through the implementation of the Centre of Excellence and large collaborative research grants. For both programmes, cooperation between scientific research institutions and at least one company is obligatory. 

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

Legal and strategic framework

According to the Law on Scientific Research Activities, conduct of scientific research activities is free and available to all domestic and foreign physical and legal persons (Article 3).

The Law on Gender Equality prescribes equal participation of women and men, equal positions and equal opportunities for exercising all rights and freedoms, as well as the use of personal knowledge and abilities for the development of society.

The Anti-Discrimination Law prohibits any form of discrimination on any grounds and determines measures to combat discrimination.

The Ministry of Science nominated a contact person for gender equality in science in 2011, responsible for the annual reporting on the implementation of the measures provided by the Plan of activities for achieving gender equality (PAPRR).

The Ministry of Science nominated representatives in the Helsinki group on Women in Science in September 2013.

Regarding promotional activities, the contact person for gender equality in science actively promotes the call for scholarships in the field of natural sciences for 2013, UNESCO – L'Oreal – 15 scholarships for young women scientists and Marie Curie Programme – Family friendly approach.

Gender balance in decision making process

Women in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2012

POSITION || TOTAL || Women || %

Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 46 || 10 || 21,74

Rector m./f. || 3 || 0 || 0

Women in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2013

POSITION || TOTAL || Women || %

Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 56 || 13 || 23,21

Rector m./f. || 3 || 0 || 0

Women in leadership positions in licensed scientific and research institutions 2013

POSITION || TOTAL || Women || %

Director m./f. or dean m./f. || 56 || 13 || 23,21

Rector m./f. || 3 || 1 || 33,33

According to UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics publication: Women in science – Explore the data for countries worldwide, 50% of researchers are women in Montenegro.

More female researchers work in the academic and government sectors while more men work in the private research sector, which offers better salaries and opportunities for advancement.

Women researchers:

· Public sector – 57%

· Academic institutions – 48%

· Private sector – 38%

In the Report on the implementation of the Action plan for achieving gender equality (2013-2017) for 2013, the Ministry of Science was responsible for the following gender specific activities: 

· Successful women in science award (for both 2012 and 2013),

· Support through funding: “Interaction of legal cultures and religions in medieval Zeta coastal towns and their impact on the identity of a woman" project (2012-2015).

Priority: Knowledge circulation

Open access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Through the call for co-financing scientific research activities, the Ministry of Science stimulates research activities on an annual basis, including the publication of scientific work in relevant scientific journals. In that way, scientific work is published in international journals from the following lists: SCI (Science Citation Index Expanded), SSCI (Social Sciences Citation Index Journal List). This is done in accordance with the areas of science JRC (Journal Citation Report Science Edition and Social Science Edition), as well as in journals from list A&HCI (Art and Humanities Citation Index), with impact factor bigger than zero. Applicants should provide evidence in their applications of published scientific work in these sources.

Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

The measures for the implementation of EU policies in the field of Science-Technology-Innovations point to the need for strengthening the knowledge users sector. This also calls to development of further initiatives in connecting the public and private sectors, the possibility of strengthening the private sector, linking initiatives between researchers in the public and private sectors, as well as encouraging research in the private sector. Special efforts are aimed at building the national innovation systems and the efficiency that consists of successful exploitation and commercialization of knowledge and research results in the manufacturing and service sectors. Organizations that promote the association of scientific research and manufacturing sectors, such as the Directorate for Development of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, Investment and Development Fund, Chamber of Commerce, the Centre for Information and Innovation, Enterprise Europe Network (EEN), and other national and international agencies and funds, are especially important in Montenegro. 

To encourage innovation a Centre of Excellence was awarded to the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Montenegro in Podgorica, for the implementation of the scientific research project Centre of Excellence in Bioinformatics – BIO-ICT, which began on June 1, 2014. The first Centre of Excellence in Montenegro will be financed up to EUR 3.42 million. Implementation of the first Centre of Excellence in Montenegro will contribute to the establishment of partnerships at national and international level. The Centre will provide funding for research through cooperation with businesses and train a new generation of young talented scientists, researchers and inventors, with a view to greater creativity and innovation. The Centre of Excellence will create long-term focused programmes and provide stable sources of financing and combine knowledge, research and innovation, that is, establish a close link between research and the economy. Through implementation of large research grants, support for larger and more impactful R&D subprojects that nurture international collaboration will be enabled, which ultimately will generate commercial innovations and strengthen the Montenegrin economy. The Ministry of Science has agreed to finance four projects over a contracting period of three years from June 1, 2014 to May 31, 2017, for a total of EUR 1.34 million.

On May 20, 2014, the Ministry established the second call for research grants with the deadline for submission on September 19, 2014, for a total of EUR 1.2 million.

Also, stimulating innovations will be enabled through the establishment of the first Science Technology Parks – a networking structure headquartered in Podgorica and three decentralized units (“Impulse Centers”) in Nikšić, Bar and Pljevlja, which will enable better connections between knowledge, research and innovation. STP will stimulate the development of entrepreneurship based on the new knowledge as a result of scientific research, encourage the exchange of new technologies between universities, scientific research institutions, companies and markets, and facilitate the creation and growth of companies based on superior scientific results turned into innovation, through the incubation processes and the establishment of spin-off companies. The establishment of the first STP in Montenegro will contribute to a significant change in the institutional framework for research, development and innovation.

Also, through the establishment of local and regional business incubators, clusters and using voucher schemes for innovation, the internationalization and commercialization of research will be promoted, and the demand for consulting services, innovation in manufacturing and services, organization and marketing will increase. These models will encourage the development of innovation and entrepreneurial activity as well as interaction with the academic community (universities, institutes, faculties). 

In addition, the training of public administrators to provide advisory services to clients is required, as well as the development of internal regulations, and an adequate representation of the scientific community in the regulation of intellectual property rights at the national and international level. This type of support will be implemented through the HERIC project, and it is necessary to consider the possibility of using technical assistance of the European Commission (e.g. TAIEX programme). All the scientific research institutions in which knowledge products, that is, intellectual property is created, should establish bodies, procedures and regulations to regulate the management of intellectual property – from the issue of author’s rights in a project, the right to register and check the feasibility of patents, technology transfer (transfer of rights to a third party, contracting technology licenses) to the provision of funding for the protection of intellectual property rights, especially patent rights.

Moreover, through the call for co-financing of scientific-research activities, the Ministry of Science stimulates the natural and legal persons from Montenegro who during 2014 realize and protect patents or develop innovative solutions that are applied in practice.

The Ministry of Science in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy will prepare a Law on Innovation Activities and submit it to the government for adoption in 2015, as well as an Innovation Strategy that will be prepared for adoption in 2016.

Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

Computer infrastructure (e-Infrastructure), as a part of the research infrastructure, has developed significantly in Montenegro in the previous period. 

As the basis for national research and education in IT infrastructure, the Montenegrin Research and Education Network (MREN) was established in 2005, with the aim to build, develop, maintain, and allow for the use of broadband ICT infrastructure to all the scientific research and educational institutions in Montenegro included into MREN, to interconnect them, and connect them with related institutions included in the pan-European research network – GEANT. It primarily provides users with internet access, information services and a connection to other national and international networks. MREN is a full member of the Trans-European Research and Education Networking Association – TERENA, and it has been connected to GEANT since October 2010.  

The Research Information System of Montenegro, E-CRIS.CG, contains information about researchers and research institutions in Montenegro. In addition, business automation and networking of libraries into a single library and the information system COBISS.CG has continued. 

In accordance with the National Library Digitization Programme adopted at the end of 2008, the National Library of Montenegro “Đurđe Crnojević” in Cetinje is developing a digital library. The library has so far scanned the most important Montenegrin periodicals and old and rare books, while the digital library is in the form of a web presentation.  

In order to improve the system of support and better availability of information to the scientific and wider community, a modern researchers’ registry portal, “Scientific Network” was developed in 2014. The portal was developed on the platform of E-CRIS universal application, which is a sophisticated information system on the research activity that belongs to the generic information system – CRIS (Current Research Information Systems). Establishment of the “Scientific Network” will allow for more intensive cooperation and communication of domestic researchers and institutions, both in the country and abroad and provide information on the scientific diaspora as well. Currently, the “Scientific Network” contains information about 1343 researchers and 56 research institutions in Montenegro.

Structure for the contribution of Associated countries to the ERA Progress Report 2014- Norway

Priority: More effective national systems

1. Research and Innovation structure

The Research Council of Norway (RCN) serves as the Government's major advisory body on research policy issues. It is responsible for the development and implementation of national research strategies and for promoting basic and applied research and innovation policies. The RCN is also responsible for evaluating research in Norway.

Approximately 30 per cent of all public R&D funding is channelled through the RCN. The remaining is directly allocated to the research institutions and to the Norwegian contribution to the EU Framework programmes.  

The RCN’s 2012 evaluation exercise found that the RCN is an effective and efficient research funding organisation, ensuring cost-effective competitive allocation of R&D funds in Norway. The evaluation concluded that more effort and funding should be allocated to prospective studies and research projects to counterbalance the inherently conservative tendencies stemming from stakeholder consultation and the peer review process.

The evaluation also found that the RCN made little systematic use of its evaluation and prospective studies. Evaluations should be embedded in the programming cycle and more effort should be devoted to better understanding the impacts of RCNs activities.

The evaluation findings were taken into account in the development of the RCN’s new evaluation policy of 2013. In 2014, the RCN established an evaluation group with the objective to give advice and develop a systematic process to enable the RCN to make more strategic choices and systematic use of evaluations.

The newly adopted government strategy on research and innovation cooperation with the EU requests that the RCN increases its focus on the integration of national and international schemes internally and externally. Similarly, the Norwegian Research and Innovation System, Statistics and Indicators (2012) suggests that it may be necessary for Norway to rethink its approach to an integrated framework programme for research and innovation, with priorities and measures allocated in accordance with the Innovation Union, thus also strengthening the country’s relevance for participating in the internal market. As a response to this a new project was launched to align national and international activities and instruments of the RCN. The project will run throughout 2014 and lay the foundation for a permanent set-up which more systematically involves integration of national and international schemes. Objectives of the project include closer cooperation between NCP's, R&D program coordinators and boards as well as developing a tool kit for the optimal alignment of international calls and strategic research and innovation agendas with national calls and agendas. 

2. National strategy for Research and Innovation

Erna Solberg’s government was appointed on 16 October 2013. It succeeded Jens Stoltenberg’s Second Government (2005–2013). The main STI priorities announced by the Solberg government are to:

· Continue building the knowledge society through an ambitious education policy (including higher education), and increased investments in research and the development of word-class research capabilities.

· Strengthen the international dimensions of research in Norway and focus on the ERA and Horizon 2020.

· Better coordinate and strategically prioritise R&D-investments with predictability and transparency, through a long-term national plan for research and higher education.

· Enhance the competiveness of Norwegian businesses, by investing in innovation, knowledge, research and technology, providing favourable framework conditions for businesses (including strengthening the Norwegian tax credit scheme for R&D – Skattefunn) and ensuring diversification of the Norwegian economy.

A new strategy for research and innovation cooperation with Europe was launched under the Solberg government by the Minister of Education and Research in June 2014. The strategy sets out clear objectives and priorities for research cooperation through the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation and the European Research Area.

A long term national plan for research and higher education was proposed during Stoltenberg’s Second Government in the 2013 white paper on research entitled «Long-term perspectives – knowledge provides opportunity», Meld. St. 18 (2012–2013). The plan aims to ensure that public investments in research and higher education are long-term and well-coordinated, with clear priorities. The Solberg government adopted the plan for research and higher education, which will set out political priorities and a roadmap for public investments in key research areas, building research infrastructure, fellowships and expanded student enrolment capacity. The long term plan will be a tool for targeting efforts towards areas in which Norway has a strategic advantage, such as in marine research.

An important competitive advantage is that employee-driven innovation is more common in Norway than elsewhere, a trend which coincides with unique opportunities for cooperation and flow of knowledge between stakeholders in research, industry, trade and society at large. Policy that facilitates such flow and helps to integrate international cooperation more closely into it will be high on the agenda.

The plan will be launched in fall 2014; it has a timeframe of 10 years and will be updated every four years.

3. Research and Innovation funding

The Norwegian government officially adopted in 2005 the Barcelona target of the EU (2002), i.e., a three per cent allocation of (GDP) on R&D by 2010 (later by 2020 within H2020). The Solberg government confirmed its commitment to the target in 2013, but introduced a new target date of 2030 to achieve the goal.

Public budgets for R&D increased in real terms in four of the five past years, with annual real growth of two per cent from 2009 to 2013. This includes contributions to the EU framework programme and the SkatteFUNN R&D tax incentive, the latter of which allows businesses and enterprises that are subject to taxation in Norway to apply for a tax deduction of up to 30 per cent of their R&D costs. Public R&D funding growth was lower than in the preceding five year period (2005 - 2009), when annual real growth was five per cent. Important drivers behind the increase in public budgets for R&D over the past 10 years include governmental commitment to increased investments in R&D, as well as increased contributions to multinational research programmes such as the EU framework programmes for research.

Norway ranks below the EU average in terms of R&D expenditure as a share of GDP: 1.66 per cent in Norway compared to 2.06 per cent in the EU28 in 2012. The difference is partly due to Norway’s high GDP (i.e. high denominator), the second highest GDP per capita in Europe. Norway maintains a high R&D expenditure per capita which is almost 60 per cent higher than that of the EU28, but significantly lower than the total R&D expenditure per capita in Sweden (3.41 per cent), Finland (3.55 per cent) and Denmark (2.99 per cent).[6]

The business sector expenditure (BERD) on R&D as a share of GDP was also lower than the EU average in 2011 (0.86 per cent in Norway compared to 1.29 per cent across the EU-28). The low BERD as a share of GDP is partly the result of the profile of the Norwegian economy which is to a large extent based on raw materials and natural resources. Firms within these sectors tend to have low R&D-intensity, although Norwegian firms invest more in R&D than their international counterparts in these areas. Norway also does not have large firms within R&D intensive sectors, such as pharmaceuticals or ICT. Large firms in these sectors traditionally invest heavily in R&D and consequently they often make the difference between countries with high and low BERD figures.  

The business sector carried out R&D totalling €2.7b (NOK21.2b) in 2012 including tax credits, which represents 44 per cent of the total R&D expenditure in Norway. The higher education sector, including university hospitals, carried out 26 per cent, and the research institute sector carried out 23 per cent of total R&D expenditure. Over a ten-year period the most important growth in R&D expenditure was in the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) sector, followed by the research institute sector.

Funding from abroad has remained stable at around eight per cent of R&D expenditure since 2005. Close to 20 per cent of the funding from abroad stems from the EU framework programmes.

4. Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

Proposals to ECN programmes are evaluated using scientific peer review. A 2001 background report (No1) explains that in 2001, the use of peer review and other evaluation measures for RCD programmes were found to be inadequate; measures have been undertaken since then to improve and develop peer review principles since that time.

5. Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

In Norway, the annual allocation of institutional funding (block-funding) to the HEIs, the research institute sector and the four national health trusts is made partly on the basis of research performance indicators. 

Performance-based funding in HEIs

About 80 per cent of government funding for R&D in HEIs is channelled directly from the Ministry of Education and Research, mainly as institutional funding. Since 2003, a funding structure has been in place for these funds, which consists of three core components:

· Basic funds without detailed specifications of its use. This component initially amounted to about 60 per cent of institutional funding (on average for all HEIs), but has decreased somewhat.

· A teaching component, in which funds are distributed on the basis of reported student performance. This component initially amounted to about one-quarter of institutional funding and has increased somewhat. 

· A research component, which amounts to about 15 per cent of institutional funding. This component is divided into two parts, a performance-based part and a strategic part, within which earmarked funds are allocated to specific institutions for positions for PhD students and for scientific equipment.

The changes in the structure of core funds, although minor, indicate nevertheless a shift to more emphasis on performance- and strategy-based core funding of research by HEIs. In the 2014 budget, the block grant funding of HEIs was increased by NOK 100 million, an increase which will be placed in the funding portion that depends on research performance.

In April 2014, the Solberg government initiated a thorough review of the entire system of direct institutional funding in the HEI-system in Norway. The review of the funding model will be carried out by an independent expert group. According to its mandate, the expert group is expected to hand over its recommendations to the government by the end of December 2014.    

Performance-based funding in the research institute sector

A system for block grant funding from the government ministries to the research institute sector has been in place since 2009, and about 50 institutes are covered by the system. A share of the block grants is allocated on the basis of the institutes’ performance on selected indicators over the previous three years. The performance-based share varies between 2.5–10 per cent for different groups of institutes.

The evaluation recommended simplifying the performance-based component of the funding system, by reducing the number of indicators in the system, as well as removing the system for determining the weights between the indicators. These recommendations were followed in a 2013 revision of the funding system. The indicators that were retained (and their weights) include: scientific publications (30 per cent), number of awarded doctoral degrees (five per cent), international research revenue (20 per cent) and revenue from national contract research (45 per cent).

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

6. Implement joint research agendas

a. FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

i. Joint programming initiatives

Norway participates in all Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) and in the EU Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-plan), as these represent topics of national importance. The JPIs target distinct social challenges and often require involvement from several policy sectors, that is, several ministries. To be able to participate in a successful manner requires harmonisation between the JPI’s research agenda and the national agenda for the particular field. In Norway this implies coordination within and between ministries: that is, between the ministries and the RCN and between different research programmes in the RCN. And last but not least, it also implies communication with the scientific community and other relevant stakeholders. For each JPI, one responsible ministry is appointed and this ministry appoints the delegate and the expert to the governing board, and defines the role of RCN in the JPIs and in the SET-plan. In RCN each JPI is organized as separate programmes with a committed JPI coordinator, as well as an advisory board or network that supports the Norwegian representatives in the governing board. The JPI coordinators in RCN meet regularly to discuss management of JPIs, and are closely connected to relevant national research programmes.

Eight of the ten JPIs Norway participate in have finalised their strategic research agendas. Two further JPIs are in progress and will be finalised in 2014.

JPI Oceans, JPI Climate, JPI for Agriculture, Food security and Climate Change (JPI FACCE), JPI for Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life (JPI HDHL) and JPI for Urban Europe represent areas of national importance with recently developed governmental research agendas / white papers.

JPI Oceans, JPI FACCE, JPI HDHL, JPI on antimicrobial resistance (JPI AMR) and JPI Urban Europe have inter-ministerial groups coordinating their activities.

The Commission supported the JPIs in 2013/2014 with networking projects to develop the JPIs and joint calls with the MS/AC (ERA-NET Co-fund). Norway participated in the following projects: 

· For JPI Climate, JPI FACCE, JPND, JPI Water Challenges, JPI Urban Europe, JPI on Cultural Heritage (JPI CH), JPI HDHL, Norway participated in several calls.

· Participation in JPI CH, JPI Water challenges and JPI AMR. 

· JPI Urban Europe and JPI Oceans related to several research programmes in RCN and have established cooperation with these.

JPI participation contributes to the Norwegian priorities and goals both nationally and internationally. In particular, the JPI Oceans is a research area of high national priority. Norway was one of the main countries initiating this topic as a theme for a JPI, and now leads the secretariat administrating JPI Oceans. A new pilot action «Intercalibration for the coastal and transitional waters of the EU Water Framework Directive» was approved at the last JPI Oceans Management Board. This action is also of considerable policy importance for Norway. And, in cooperation with other initiatives the JPI Oceans established a new database on Marine Research Infrastructures.

b. Other joint research agendas

In addition to JPIs, Norway participates actively in all transnational research and innovation at the Nordic level. Nordic collaboration has been and still is an important part of the overall Norwegian policy for internationalisation of Norwegian research is a central platform for the wider national efforts to develop ERA. 

7. Openness of Member State/Associated Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation

Norway engages in international research cooperation for three main reasons:

· To address global challenges,

· To increase the quality and relevance of Norwegian research, and

· To increase the competitiveness of Norwegian businesses.

The White Paper entitled Long-term perspectives – knowledge provides opportunity (Report to the Storting, 2012-2013) identifies eight countries outside the EU that are prioritized for strategic research cooperation. These are China, Brazil, India, Russia, Canada, USA, South-Africa and Japan. The Minister of Education and Research recently decided to develop a national strategy on how international cooperation in higher education and research with the BRIC countries could be further strengthened. The strategy is expected to be finalized in 2015.

To promote international research cooperation with strategic partners, Norway initiates bilateral cooperation with other countries in various forms and participates in a number of multilateral initiatives. These are usually initiated or supported at a European level.

To improve national understanding of international research cooperation and enable Norway to develop better priorities and informed decisions, the RCN commissioned an extensive bibliometric analysis of all research publications by Norwegian authors and their cooperation (co-authorship) with more than 50 other countries. The results of this analysis will also feed into an RCNs initiative to develop road maps for priorities in future cooperation with eight prioritized third countries. The roadmaps are expected to be finalized in 2014.

Norway is an active participant in the Strategic Forum for International S&T Cooperation (SFIC) which is becoming increasingly important for the country’s strategic approach to international research cooperation. There is strong overlap between priorities in SFIC and Norway. 

Priority: Research Infrastructures

8. Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

a. Participation in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap

The first version of the Norwegian Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (RI) was published in 2010. It presented large-scale projects of national importance that had achieved very high ranking in the first call for funding after the establishment of a new National Financing Initiative for Research Infrastructure in the White Paper ‘Climate for Research’ (2008-2009) (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2009). The roadmap was updated in 2012 and was updated again in April 2014. Operational costs for using RI are eligible in all of RCN’s funding schemes.

Research infrastructures include advanced scientific equipment, large-scale research facilities, scientific databases and collections, and electronic infrastructure (e-infrastructure).

The RCN is responsible for developing a Norwegian roadmap for investments in RI and for updating the national RI roadmap on a bi-annual basis. The roadmap is restricted to projects found to be ready for investment through a two-step quality assessment procedure based on international evaluation committees. These investments must be selected on the basis of stringent criteria in terms of quality as well as relevance and benefit to society. RCN has to assess grant applications for RI involving investment costs starting at NOK 2 million upwards, and can grant a maximum of NOK 200 million in project funding. Recommendations for allocations of over NOK 200 million must be submitted by the RCN to the relevant ministry for special consideration and, possibly, final allocation of funding. 

There is no national scheme available for RI with investment costs less than NOK 2 million. RI of this magnitude is the responsibility of the research performing organisations (PROs and HEIs), which are free to finance whatever scientific equipment they judge appropriate.

The Ministry of Education and Research is responsible for following Norwegian participation in projects on the ESFRI Roadmap to the RCN. Projects in the ESFRI roadmap in which Norway participates in the preparatory phase have to undergo a thorough review by RCN and have to be considered by RCN to be of major strategic importance for Norwegian research, before they are included in the Norwegian roadmap.

Norway is currently participating in the construction phase of 12 different ESFRI projects with funding from the national financing initiative for research infrastructure. Norway hosted the CESSDA AS meeting in Bergen, held in December 2013. Norway also offered to host SIOS and ECCSEL which are being planned with broad international participation. Norway will also contribute to the construction of the European Spallation Source (ESS) in Sweden with 2.5 per cent of the total construction costs.

The Ministry of Education and Research and other relevant ministries have, on the basis of the Research Council recommendations and funding through the national infrastructure road map, committed Norway as a member of the pan- European research infrastructures ELIXIR (bioinformatics) and as an observer in CLARIN ERIC , ESSurvey ERIC , BBMRI ERIC and Euro Argo ERIC. The Research Council also allocated funds for UNINETT Sigma, a subsidiary of the UNINETT[7], for their participation in Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe (PRACE). Norway also participates in planning EISCAT_3D radars in Northern Scandinavia.

In addition, Norway takes part or participated in 12 other preparatory phase projects of the ESFRI Roadmap. Decisions on Norway’s commitments to these ESFRI-projects will be taken based on the outcome of open, competitive calls in the national financing initiative for research infrastructure. 

In general, there are no legal barriers to cross-border access to RI in Norway. 

b. Participation in ERICs

With regards participating in the European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Norway is observer in three out of the nine consortia which adopted the legal framework designed by the Commission to facilitate the establishment and operation of research infrastructures of European interest involving several European countries, namely ESS ERIC, BBMRI ERIC and EURO-Argo ERIC.

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

9. Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

There is a long tradition of meritocracy and open and transparent recruiting processes in Norwegian academia. All vacant positions over one year in length must be publically announced and all are evaluated by a peer review committee. In recent years, compulsory international announcement of vacancies, combined with a cultural change towards internationalisation at most Norwegian HEIs has improved international recruitment substantially.

In 2012, 20 per cent of academic personnel in Norway were non-Norwegian citizens. This is a 150 per cent increase in 10 years. To continue the positive trend, the Government and the HEIs will cooperate further to improve routines and practices for open international recruitment of researchers.

10. Researchers careers

Given the increase in international staff at Norwegian HEIs, the next step is to improve practices for better career policies. The RCN and The Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) concluded that the HEIs do not have robust and systematic career policies in place, and that there is a demand for this, not least by younger staff.

Here, formal structures (regulations, national and local strategies, Charter & Code, etc) and traditions and cultural dimensions both among leaders and the individual researchers have to be combined. The present government has therefore included Researchers Careers as one of its seven main points for better quality in the Norwegian knowledge sector. Parallel to this, UHR has established a working group on the same topic. The Research Council, the Ministry and the UHR are working closely to coordinate and combine efforts to improve the situation.

A significant number of HEIs have signed the contract for HR excellence in research, and five out of eight Norwegian universities have so far obtained the logo.

11. Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

Researchers of any nationality can apply for research funding to the Research Council of Norway.  They do not need any employment contract with a national research institution, however all submissions to the Research Council must be submitted through a national research institution. The regulations of the Research Council allow for funding on research and innovation projects to be spent by partners abroad. The requirement is that the activity supports the purpose of the call. The regulation also allows for researchers at national research institutions, with projects funded by the Research Council, to take the grant with her/him to a foreign research institution in the case of change of employment. As the funding contract is between a national research institution and the Research Council, this requires consent from the national research institution.

12. Support structured innovative doctoral training programmes

PhD education in Norway has since 2003 had a compulsory course programme (30 ECTs). Courses include academic as well as generic and transferable skills. Norwegian PhD education was evaluated in 2012. Among the conclusions were the need to strengthen the supervisor’s competence in general and importance of supervision practices in developing candidates’ generic skills. The Recommended Guidelines for the Doctor of Philosophiae Degree made by UHR also underlines the responsibility of the supervisor.

UHR has established a group to look at researchers’ careers, also outside the HEI sector. The IDT-principles are a basis for this discussion. UHR also cooperates with the research institute sector and the RCN to identify and deal with challenges between the two sectors. The research institutes have a great potential as partners/resources in PhD education.

UHR is about to establish a new national working group with a mandate to identify and resolve a set of challenges related to joint PhD degrees. Among other things, the group will deal with quality assurance, challenges related to legislation/regulations and funding and joint degrees as a component of internationalisation.

A scheme for industrial PhDs has been established to increase the recruitment of researchers to Norwegian industry, boost long-term competence-building, increase research efforts in business and industry, and enhance interaction between academia and industry. Currently there are 162 candidates in the scheme. This year a similar scheme for public sector PhDs was established.

A scheme of National Research Schools provides funding to 15 national researcher schools across the country. The schools are managed by the RCN. The aim of the scheme is to improve the quality of PhD training, and increase the rate of PhD students completing the program, and shorten the time to degree.

13. Support mobility between private and public sector

There is significant mobility of researchers between sectors in Norway. A survey (SIM-ReC) showed that 34 per cent of researchers in the HEI sector had experience from working in other sectors, the average among the participating countries in the survey was 23 per cent. Of the PhD candidates, 60 per cent found employment outside the HEI sector.

There remains a challenge, however, to increase mobility and knowledge sharing across sectors. The introduction of industrial PhDs is one important tool. Another tool is to encourage the establishment of professor II/associate professor II positions among HEIs and private sector/industry. These are positions where researchers hold a position in one institution in addition to their full-time permanent position in another institution.

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

14. Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

a. National policies on gender equality in public research

The government implemented several measures to strengthen gender balance in the higher education sector. In 2004 the Ministry of Education and Research appointed the Committee for Gender Balance in Research (http://eng.kifinfo.no/). The current KIF-committee started up in January 2014 for a new three year period. The mandate of the committee will now include diversity and gender in the content of research in addition to gender balance.

All state higher education institutions are expected to adopt action plans for gender equality, and the Ministry has established a gender equality prize that is awarded to the university, the university college or the research institute with best results on improving the gender balance within the institution.

Gender equality is implemented in legislation, requiring a minimum of 40 per cent of each sex in the composition of boards, panels and committees. Practising gender balance as a standard requirement has successfully brought Norway and other Nordic countries to a European lead position of the share of women on scientific boards and in management positions. However, Norway is at the European average when it comes to the total share of women faculty and women in grade A positions.

Experience shows that a proactive policy has significant effect. One example is the University of Tromsø, which has shifted from being the Norwegian university with the lowest share of women professors (9 per cent in 2002), to the university with the highest share (30 per cent) ten years later. This progress is a result of concrete actions and dedicated leadership. Another example is the Norwegian Centres of Excellence (CoE) scheme. When the Research Council introduced a set of «soft push» measures to counter gender imbalance at the second CoE call in 2005, the results were satisfactory. The same results have been also achieved in the last call of the CoE-scheme in 2011/2012. These experiences are examples of good practice on how to significantly increase the involvement of women in schemes of excellence in science.

In 2013 the RCN launched a new policy on gender equality and gender perspectives in research and innovation. Building on former policies, the Research Council wants to be a driving force, both nationally and internationally. The Director General of RCN states that Norway must aspire to become one of the leading countries in Europe in this area.  

To boost gender balance at the highest levels in Norwegian research, the Research Council in 2013 initiated a new program on Gender Balance in Senior Positions and Research Management, called BALANSE. This new program funds innovative measures and supports mutual learning between different parts of the research system, both in the public sector and in private industry.

The RCN is also involved in a new policy-oriented ERA-NET GENDER-NET, set up in October 2013. GENDER-NET is led by CNRS in France and consists of 12 different partners from 11 countries. The overall objective is to promote gender equality in research institutions and the integration of the gender dimension in research content, by sharing best practice, optimizing transferability and proposing joint initiatives and indicators for monitoring and progress. 

The information centre KILDEN systematically disseminates research-based knowledge on gender in Norway. KILDEN has the national responsibility for promotion and information about Norwegian gender research nationally and abroad and promotes the documentation of resources and activities within gender research in Norway. KILDEN’s target groups are gender researchers, the academic communities in general, journalists, politicians, public administrators, students and the public in general.

Priority: Knowledge circulation

15. Open access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Productive cooperation and use of R&D depends on access to research results. In principle, all research that is wholly or partially funded by public sources must be made openly accessible. This is stated in the White Paper ‘Climate for Research’ (2008-2009). This was followed by the establishment of CRISTin, a public open access database for research publications. In 2012 and 2013, CRIStin focused on the following areas:

· The Ministry of Education and Research's project on Open Access,

· Infrastructure related to institutional repositories, and

· Networking and information.

There is also ongoing work in the RCN to implement these policy goals and to develop national policies on both open access to publication and to scientific data.

16. Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

Both open innovation and knowledge transfer have been issues in government policies for higher education and research of considerable importance for years. Since the change of the University Act and the Employee Invention Act in 2003, Norway has undertaken a large number of activities promoting knowledge transfer, such as:

· Coordinating IP policies for universities,

· Launching several research programs aimed at commercialization, and

· Innovation and co-operation between research communities and actors within the business sectors, NGOs and public sector.

The increasing policy focus on open innovation issues does not undermine current IP policies. On the contrary, insights from the open innovation perspective make policy makers more conscious about when and how IP policy measures should be appropriately applied.

The Government commissioned in 2014 an assessment of the policy instruments for knowledge transfer and commercialisation of publicly-funded research in Norway. The results of the evaluation are expected by June 2015. 

Switzerland

Priority: More effective national systems

Research and Innovation structure

Swiss research policy is characterised by continuity and stability, including the level of R&D spending. Important characteristics of R&D funding in Switzerland are the high priority of competition in selecting organisations for funding, the bottom-up principle in defining the content (i.e. no thematic programmes), and the absence of instruments to directly support private R&D.

Political responsibilities for research and higher education are divided between the federal state (Confederation) and the regional authorities (the Cantons). The Confederation is responsible for the direct funding of research and the coordination of research activities. The Confederation is responsible for the two Federal Institutes of Technology (FITs) in Zurich (ETHZ) and Lausanne (EPFL). The Cantons are responsible for their universities, while a national act regulates federal support to these institutions.

At the federal level, as of 2013 responsibilities for research and higher education are concentrated in the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), which is part of the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research (EAER).[8]

At the intermediary level, the main actors are the two project funding agencies – the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and the Swiss Innovation Promotion Agency (CTI)- and an advisory body, the Swiss Science and Innovation Council. The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) is a private foundation, overseen by the State Secretariat for Education and Research and Innovation (SERI, part of EAER) and funded by the Confederation, responsible for the funding of basic research. Moreover, it manages the programme aiming to create ‘National Centres of Competence in Research’ (NCCR) at the national level as well as  National Research Programmes (NRP). The Swiss Innovation Promotion Agency (CTI) is the federal agency for innovation, which supports joint projects of universities and private companies as well as innovation activities.

Research and Innovation funding

The parliamentary bill ‘Message on the promotion of education, research and innovation for 2013-2016’ increases the amount of grant funding awarded on a competitive basis for research and innovation.

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

Competitive funding lies at the core of the Swiss research and innovation system: both SNSF and CTI allocate their competitive funding by submitting projects to a thorough peer review in line with international standards.

With regard to the SNSF’s project funding, which is the SNSF’s main instrument[9], external reviewers assess the applications on the basis of the criteria specified by the SNSF such as the scientific quality of the research proposal, the scientific value and relevance of the project, the originality of research objectives, the adequacy of methodical approach, the feasibility of the project, the scientific track record of the applicants and the applicants' expertise in relation to the project. The reviewers work independently of each other and their assessments are made available to the applicants in full on the mySNF platform. The reviewer's identity remains concealed. Decisions are based on clearly defined procedures and rules. Researchers receive clear and useful information concerning the evaluation of their applications and the respective decisions of the SNSF.

In the context of the SNSF’s career funding schemes, the transmission of external reviews is mandatory for all applications within the scope of Ambizione and SNSF professorships which reach the second stage as well as for Assistant Professor Energy Grants. For all other career funding schemes, an external review is possible but not mandatory. The referee and the co-referee decide whether an external review is required.

The CTI promotes applied research and development projects involving both universities and industry. While it is open to any discipline, the main focus of its promotional activities is on life sciences, engineering, nanotechnologies, microsystems technology and enabling sciences. The promotional activities of the CTI are based on the “bottom up” approach. Similar to the SNF, the CTI uses a peer-review process to evaluate and select projects. Only universities and universities of applied sciences are eligible for funding.

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

Political responsibilities for research and higher education are divided between the federal state (Confederation) and the regional authorities (the Cantons). The Confederation is responsible for the direct funding of research and for the coordination of research activities. The Confederation is responsible for the two Federal Institutes of Technology (FITs) in Zurich (ETHZ) and Lausanne (EPFL). The Cantons are responsible for their universities, while the Federal Law on Financial Aid to Universities (UFG) regulates federal support to these institutions. The Federal Law on Financial Aid to Universities obliges the Swiss Confederation and the cantons to safeguard and improve the quality of teaching and research in higher education (Article 7); furthermore, the UFG defines the review of the performance quality of a university as a prerequisite for federal subsidies (Article 11, Paragraph 3, Letter a.). The requirements in respect of quality assurance of universities and the conduct of the audit by the Swiss Center of Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Higher Education (OAQ) are laid down in the ‘Quality Assurance Guidelines ’. These are compatible with the ‘European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) ’, which were developed by the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA).

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

Switzerland has a long tradition of participation in international programmes at European level. At present around 12per cent of all federal resources for the promotion of education, research and innovation go to international cooperation activities.

Implement joint research agendas FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

i. Joint programming initiatives

Cooperation between countries is fostered by the EU Framework Programme. The share of participation of Switzerland in total participation under FP 7 was 3.31 per cent, and Switzerland received 4.4 per cent of total EC contributions.[10]

Switzerland also participates in the Cooperation in Science and Technology in Europe (COST), where the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation provides additional funding for research in COST actions with Swiss participation.

ii. ART. 185 initiatives

Switzerland is also involved in four Art. 185 Initiatives: Active and Assisted Living Research and Development Programme (AAL), Eurostars, European Metrology Research Programme (EMPIR) and European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP).

iii. ERA-Nets

At present Switzerland is taking part in some 25 ERA-NET initiatives (ERA-NET and ERA-Net plus) covering several areas of research as well as in 5 JPIs. Through project funding or the National Research Programmes (NRPs) the SNFS supports researchers’ participation in Joint Programming Initiatives or ERA-NETs. For example, research groups in the NRPs 68 and 69 can submit proposals for EU Joint Programming Initiatives. In addition to their own budget of 13 million Swiss Francs each, NRP 68 and NRP 69 have together up to 4 million Swiss Francs available for participating in calls of JPIs, such as FACCE – JPI. Moreover, since the activities coordinated by the European Science Foundation (ESF) are scheduled to end by 2015 and Joint Programming Initiatives are taking time to get off the ground, ERA-NETs are becoming increasingly important.

Other joint research agendas

Switzerland further participates in the European technology initiative EUREKA, where Swiss participations are funded through the CTI. Switzerland holds the EUREKA Chairmanship from July 2014 until June 2015.

Switzerland also maintains membership in the following international research organisations and initiatives: ESA, CERN, ESRF, EMB, ESO, ILL, CIESM and HFSP.

In general, Swiss participation in international programmes and opening of national programmes reflects the decentralised nature of Swiss research policy and less focus on grand challenges. Research funding organisations are generally both willing and adequately funded to participate.

Openness of Member State/Associated Country (MS/AC) for international cooperation

Whereas in the past, federal policies on bilateral research cooperation were strongly geared towards cooperation with Europe and North America, the Federal Council has added new geographical regions since 2008. The strategic focus is currently on new countries that offer significant scientific and technological development potential. Eight non-European countries have been identified as potential partners: China, India, Russia, South Africa (including research institutes in Côte d'Ivoire and Tanzania) as well as Japan, South Korea and Brazil. Corresponding framework agreements have either already been signed with the governments of these countries or are currently in the pipeline. In the eight federal bilateral research programmes launched so far, a total of 150 Joint Research Projects (JRPs) are currently underway and around 400 exchange projects (Faculty Exchange, Student Exchange and Joint Utilization of Advanced Facilities) have been sponsored. Finally, funding has been provided for over 40 partnerships between higher education and research institutions. These developments are also supported through the establishment of Swissnex offices, science consulates promoting and supporting Swiss science in key locations around the globe.

Through their joint programme, SCOPES, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and the SNSF support scientific collaboration between researchers in Switzerland and their colleagues in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In Eastern European countries the programme is designed to strengthen individual research capacities, promote the institutional development of research and teaching, and improve integration into the international scientific community. Swiss researchers have already come to appreciate their partners in Eastern Europe for their high levels of scientific competence, specialisation and creativity. In addition, collaborative projects for which the Eastern European partners have virtually no resources at their disposal permit comparative studies or access to research objects such as ecosystems or patient pools. SCOPES contributes to further increasing the performance and competitiveness of Eastern European partners, in preparation for future collaboration in EU Framework Programmes for Research.

Through the Swiss Programme for Research on Global Issues for Development (r4d) the SDC and the SNSF jointly support partnership projects between researchers in Switzerland and in developing and emerging countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. r4d promotes development-relevant research on global issues which through new insights and innovative approaches contributes to sustainable global development. The focus is on reducing poverty and protecting public goods in developing countries. There are five main topics: poverty reductions, food security, supply and financing mechanisms in health care, sustainable use of ecosystems and the mechanisms underlying causes and solutions in social conflicts. Resources are also available for projects on topics freely chosen by researchers.

Regarding bi- or multilateral agreements or programmes among EU-MS and AC, the SNSF reached an agreement with Germany (DFG) and Austria (FWF) concerning joint financing of bilateral or trilateral projects. Moreover, bilateral Lead Agency agreements were signed with the National Research Fund (FNR) of Luxembourg and the French National Research Agency (ANR).

Interoperability, mutual recognition of evaluation results and other schemes

The mutual recognition of evaluations is becoming more and more important. For instance, the SNSF developed procedures with Germany (DFG) and Austria (FWF) concerning joint financing of bilateral or trilateral projects, where submission and evaluation takes place in one of the three countries, while funding is on national basis (lead agency procedures) or from the country where most of the research is performed (money follows cooperation line procedure). Moreover, bilateral Lead Agency agreements were signed with the National Research Fund (FNR) of Luxembourg and the French ANR. With some other countries discussions with regard to the mutual recognition of evaluations are underway.

Common funding principles to make national research programmes compatible, interoperable (cross-border) and simpler for researchers

International integration and mobility are increasingly fundamental to researchers. In many areas of specialisation international contacts are a precondition for excellent research. Through the association Science Europe, which groups together its sister organisations, the SNSF as part of the Grant Union is working to improve the institutional framework conditions for international research. Existing agreements serve to promote mobility within Europe (the Money Follows Researcher scheme) and to facilitate joint research projects with specific countries (Lead Agency or Money follows Cooperation Line). The SNSF is working to extend these agreements, also to G8 countries.

As mentioned above, the SNSF has signed a trilateral agreement with the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) in Germany and the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). A bilateral agreement has been signed with the National Research Fund (FNR) of Luxembourg. The agreements allow researchers in these countries to submit a joint proposal to only one of the funding agencies, the "Lead Agency". The Lead Agency is the funding agency that, in case of approval, will fund the largest part of the project. It evaluates the entire proposal independently. The partner organisation accepts the outcome of the evaluation and, in case of a positive result, each organisation funds the part of the project that is conducted in its country.

Moreover,  an other agreement allows Swiss researchers and their French partners to jointly submit an application to a single organisation, the "Lead Agency". The SNSF and the ANR have agreed to take turns as the Lead Agency on a yearly basis.

For researchers moving abroad, it is possible to transfer Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) funding to finalise the project. SNSF funding for stays abroad is not restricted to the European Union, allowing outward mobility to third countries as well.

Regarding  ​the Money follows Cooperation Line, this is currently possible in Germany and Austria (very small sub-projects) and in the UK (only in the humanities and social sciences).

The Money follows Researcher process is aimed at researchers who move abroad and would like current SNSF funding to continue. In principle, a continuation of the project is possible in any country. The project can either continue in Switzerland while being managed from abroad or transferred to the new location.

Priority: Research Infrastructures

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

In October 2013 the Federal Council approved Switzerland’s participation in ELIXIR and authorised the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation to sign the international ELIXIR Consortium Agreement.

a. Participation in the development and operation of EIROs

Moreover, Switzerland successfully participates in all of the eight EIROforum organisations which have extensive expertise in the areas of basic research and the management of large, international infrastructures, facilities and research programmes. These research infrastructures are the European Laboratory for Particle Physics in Geneva (CERN), European Space Agency in Paris (ESA), European Southern Observatory in Garching and Telescope in Chile (ESO), European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble (ESRF), European X-ray Free-Electron Laser in Hamburg (European XFEL), Institute Max von Laue - Paul Langevin in Grenoble (ILL), the European Molecular Biology Conference in Heidelberg (EMBC), and EUROfusion (Swiss fusion research).

b. Participation in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap

On the basis of the Swiss Roadmap for Research Infrastructures (update of March 2012), in the parliamentary bill on the promotion of education, research and innovation for 2013-2016 (‘Message on the promotion of education, research and innovation for 2013-2016’ - ERI) the federal government confirmed its financial commitment to the construction and operation of regional, national and international research infrastructures of pan-European interest. The SERI can mandate the SNSF to finance research infrastructures in particular subject areas relating to the Swiss roadmap for research infrastructures and to the ESFRI Roadmap (European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures). In the period 2013 to 2016, according to the ERI bill, the SNSF will support Switzerland’s participation in the European Social Survey (ESS), the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) and the Integrated Carbon Observation System (ICOS), as well as in the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resource Research Infrastructure (BBMRI), and the European Clinical Research Infrastructures Network (ECRIN).

Participation in ERICs

ESFRI has introduced a new legal framework (ERIC) for European Research Infrastructures of the ESFRI Roadmap which is based on European law. Switzerland intends to participate in several of these research infrastructures. However, some legal issues of the ERIC framework do not correspond with Swiss Law, which leads to the situation that Switzerland currently lacks the legal basis for participation in these projects. Enabling the Swiss participation in ERIC research infrastructures means adapting the Swiss law on research and innovation, which needs the approval of the Federal Parliament. Currently, the issue is in inter-ministerial discussion. The decision concerning the Swiss participation in ERICs will be known by the beginning of 2015 at the latest.

Access to Research Infrastructures of pan-European interest

Switzerland also invests funds in national top research infrastructures accessible to foreign partners such as Swissfel, Swiss Light source, CSCS (Centro Svizzero di Calcolo Scientifico/Swiss National Supercomputing Centre) and others. Swiss research infrastructures are generally accessible to foreigners, also through funds granted by EU research programmes. Nationals from EU/EFTA States can benefit from the agreement on the free movement of persons to establish themselves in Switzerland.[11]

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

All universities and most of the other research institutions have signed the Charter for Researchers and the Code on Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers of which Switzerland was an early adopter. Rules concerning academic staff at Swiss universities make little or no distinction between Swiss and foreign applicants. There are no recruitment procedures that may hinder the openness or discourage participation of non-national applicants. Within the framework of the Swiss-EU Bilateral Agreement on Free Movement of Persons[12], Switzerland has adopted the EU’s system of mutual recognition of foreign qualifications issued by EU member states. Third-country nationals are also entitled to apply for recognition of their foreign qualifications in Switzerland.

As a general rule any scientist working in Switzerland, regardless of their nationality, can apply for funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and other public funding sources.

Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

With respect to the portability of grants, the main principle for most European countries is Money Follows Researcher: researchers who move abroad can ask for ongoing SNSF funding to continue. All SNSF grants are portable to other countries (worldwide) under the EUROHORCS ‘Money follows researcher’ scheme if the project leader moves to another country during the grant period. The project leaders can either manage the project from abroad or take the funds – including employees – to their new institution. In 2013, 16 SNSF grants were transferred in this way (compared to 15 SNSF grants in 2011), with a total transferred amount of CHF 1.9 million (some EUR 1.54 million; compared to CHF 2.2 million in 2011). Funding of whole research groups based abroad is generally not allowed, though the Sinergia instrument allows funding of a single research group based outside Switzerland but within a consortium of Swiss-based research groups.

Switzerland has also been active in the EURAXESS initiative since 2008. Swissuniversities acts as country coordinator and has also issued Euraxess Zurich the mandate to participate in the Euraxess TOP 2 project (Enhancing the Outreach and Effectiveness of the Euraxess Network). More detailed information can be found in the country profile for Switzerland in the Researchers’ Report 2013.[13]

Support structured innovative doctoral training programmes

The Swiss University Conference Programme “Doctoral Programmes” (2012/2013-2016) run by the Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS) is the successor to the former ProDoc Programme (2008-2011). The Programme supports universities in the creation and development of interuniversity doctoral programmes in order to strengthen research networking and improve the integration of doctoral students. The long-term objective of the Programme is to offer appropriate training schemes to all doctoral students, including those in humanities and social sciences and, in this way, to strengthen doctoral education and the career prospects of doctorate holders.

At the same time, the skills and competencies of researchers are increasingly becoming an explicit part of doctoral training. This aspect is given special consideration in the development of new doctoral programmes. All Swiss universities share the same objectives in relation to doctorates. These are laid down in the joint position paper by the Swiss universities on the Doctorate: “Excellence through Research”[14] . These are in line with the position of European countries within the Bologna framework.

It defines the purpose of the doctorate as being to:

· develop academic skills, especially the ability to carry out independent scholarly research;

· acquire subject-specific (disciplinary and interdisciplinary), methodological and transferable knowledge and skills;

· promote academic collaboration and networks with other doctoral candidates as well as with researchers and specialists in Switzerland and abroad.

The doctorate qualifies candidates for research-based professions at universities or other institutions (public sector, private enterprise, administration) and enables them to take on diverse high-level responsibilities and functions.

The mentoring programmes of the Swiss University Conference Sub-programme Equal Opportunity at Universities 2013-2016 offer structural courses to improve the necessary skills of young (women) academics.

Support mobility between private and public sector

In general, Swiss Universities (not considering Universities of Applied Sciences) focus on basic research whereas the private sector mainly undertakes applied research. This division guarantees a complementarity between Universities and the private sector, where proximity between both sectors is sought. For instance, the pharmaceutics industry collaborates closely with Universities throughout Switzerland (notably in Basel, Zurich, Geneva), and there are e.g. common research labs of IBM and the ETH Zurich. Mobility between the private sector and Universities takes thus place on an ad-hoc basis.

More established programmes exist with regard to the Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences: Researchers working in the Universities of Applied Sciences have gained experience in higher education teaching and in the private sector (‘double profile’). Thus, almost all researchers have moved at least once from business to the public sector and vice versa during their career. Moreover, researchers maintain close contacts with the business sector and the labour market in general, as most research projects are carried out in collaboration with external partners (both industrial and in areas such as health or social work).

The following key programmes have been designed to boost collaboration between academia and industry, and to foster doctoral training in cooperation with industry:

· Commission for Technology and Innovation (CTI): The CTI supports R&D projects, and encourages entrepreneurship and the development of start-up companies. It runs a coaching scheme that leads to the award of the CTI Start-up Label, which is to help start-ups attract venture capital. Moreover, it helps optimise knowledge and technology transfer through the use of thematic and regional networks and platforms with a budget of some EUR 125 million. The CTI funds the Universities of Applied Sciences in the execution of research projects in close collaboration with industrial partners. 51.1per cent of CTI project funding went to Universities of Applied Sciences in 2013[15].

· KTT Initiative (CTI) : This fosters the transfer of Knowledge and Technology Transfer (KTT) between the Universities and regional businesses. KTT consortia support SMEs and the Universities in establishing contacts and developing projects.

· National Research  Programmes (SNSF): The National Research Programmes promote innovative solutions aimed at solving Switzerland’s most pressing problems in collaboration with industrial partners.

· Venturelab (IFJ Startup support)  : Venturelab was launched in 2004 as a national training program for innovative high-tech startups. Working in close partnership with the CTI, Venturelab organises venture ideas and venture challenge training modules at universities all over Switzerland. In addition, Venturelab provides high level training programmes for industry partners and corporate clients. Venturelab is run by IFJ (Institut für Jungunternehmen/Institute for Start-ups)

· BREF Programme (Gebert Rüf Foundation + Rectors' Conference of the Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences (KFH)): The BREF Programme promotes collaboration between Switzerland’s business sector and/or society and the Universities of Applied Sciences.

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

Foster cultural and institutional change on gender

a. National policies on gender equality in public research

The Swiss Federal Equal Opportunity at Universities Programme has been designed to promote gender equality at Swiss universities since the year 2000. For the years 2013-16, the Swiss federal government has allocated CHF 9.8 million to support the universities in their work to promote and ensure gender equality. Pending decisions by the Swiss University Conference (SUC) and the Federal Parliament, the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) oversees the disposition of the funds to the universities through the Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS). Universities receiving federal funding must dedicate matching funds to gender equality work (usually 50 per cent over the four-year period).

The goal of the Federal Program is to achieve a quota of 25per cent female professors at Swiss universities, and 40per cent women at the level of assistant professor; in addition, the proportion of women in leading academic positions and management bodies at universities and related institutions should be increased. At present, however, these goals have not yet been reached.

For the years 2013-16 the federal government only provides funding for gender equality work done on the basis of the universities’ individual action plans. The plans must address the issue of gender equality on a structural level in all key areas of activity: teaching, research and outreach.

The document Standards for Action Plans 53/11 defines the following areas as eligible for funding:

· Establishment of gender equality in university structures and as part of the quality management

· Increasing percentages of women professors (including assistant professors), women in academic decision-making positions

· Training for PhD students and postdocs

· Work-life balance with respect to studying at university, pursuing an academic career, family and personal/private responsibilities 

· Women and STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics)

· Human resources and organisational development

· Integrating gender aspects into teaching and learning (education) as well as research.

More detailed information can be found in the country profile for Switzerland in the Researchers’ Report 2013 at http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/ services/researchPolicies.

Furthermore, the SNSF has adopted the principle of gender mainstreaming and defined gender equality as a target for all its bodies and across all its activities. It is closely monitoring developments both in Switzerland and abroad and adjusting its funding schemes to meet the changing needs of researchers.

b. Careers – Working conditions in public research

The SNSF has implemented a range of measures to increase the share of women in its funding schemes. This includes mentoring programmes offering personal support as well as specific schemes and measures to promote the research careers of women.

Gender balance in decision making process

With appropriate measures, the SNSF aims to contribute to gender equality in research funding. It has adopted the principle of gender mainstreaming and defined gender equality as a target for all its bodies and across all its activities.

The Swiss National Science Foundation promotes a representative gender balance in the election of researchers in SNSF’s evaluation committees. A decision by SNSF bodies not to include female researchers must be explicitly justified. The SNSF has defined its commitment to gender equality in a mission statement. Apart from the principles, the document also sets out gender equality standards and measures for research funding and the Administrative Offices.

With a view to finding new approaches to old challenges, the SNSF appointed a new Gender Equality Commission at the beginning of May 2014. This independent body composed of international experts will advise the SNSF on gender equality issues and help in developing new strategies.

Gender dimension in research content / programmes

A National Research Programme (NRP) on gender equality is on-going in Switzerland.[16] The NRP "Gender Equality" (NRP 60) [17] aims to analyse gender equality policy and measures in Switzerland and to investigate the reasons for persisting inequalities between men and women. The research findings should inform the development of a sustainable gender equality policy. The research projects started in autumn 2010.

Priority: Knowledge circulation

Open access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Research funded by the public should be publicly accessible as far as possible and, what is more, free of charge. The SNSF is has therefore formulated a policy striving to help establish open access, i.e. free access to scientific publications. It expects researchers to self-archive their publications and supports publication in OA journals.

With regard to Open Access, researchers funded by the SNSF are obligated as before to, at least, self-archive their work in addition to having it published for the first time in a journal (Green Road to OA). In line with the policy of the European Research Council, the SNSF is recommending solutions that involve short embargo periods of no more than six months. If there is an option to publish directly in an OA journal, the SNSF encourages researchers to choose this Gold Road through a new supporting measure: as of October 2013, researchers will be able to cover the corresponding publication costs through their project budgets. Along with most other European research funders, the SNSF continues to reject the option of OA of already published articles in a journal against a fee (hybrid OA) as it involves double payment for the same service.

As of 1 July 2014, researchers can also request funding for digital book publications when submitting their project proposal. Book publications resulting from projects submitted before 1 July 2014 or already approved ongoing projects can be funded through the scheme "publication grants" till the end of 2017.[18]

Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

a. National support to KT and OI, TTOs and Private Public interaction

Several parliamentary motions were introduced in the past years to ensure greater transparency and cooperation in the area of research policy. The Federal Law on the Promotion of Research and Innovation (FIFG) specifies that research institutions must take care that their research results are available for the public. They also must support analysis and utilisation of research work.

To ensure greater transparency and cooperation in the area of research policy, the ARAMIS information system for government research (“Ressortforschung”) makes information on research projects and assessments contracted or conducted by the federal administration accessible to the general public and project managers. The Federal Statistical Office (FSO) and the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) are able to use this detailed information for statistical and other assessment purposes.

Swiss universities, the Swiss Confederation, cantons with universities and the federal bodies responsible for education policy are cooperating, through the SWITCH Foundation, to promote optical fibre interconnection of universities, universal login procedures, the digital repositories library and applications of e-identity to academia.

The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) fosters cooperation among researchers by using it as an evaluation criterion. Furthermore, it provides instruments explicitly requiring cooperation, notably the interdisciplinary instruments National Centres of Competence in Research (NCCR) and National Research Programmes (NRP). Most of the budget of the Commission for Technology and Innovation (CTI) is devoted to projects promoting cooperative research between higher education institutions and private companies, especially those without their own research capacity, essentially small and medium enterprises (SMEs). As of 2013, Swiss companies received additional long-term support for innovative activities when national thematic networks (NTNs), innovation mentors (IMs) and physical and web-based platforms for Knowledge and Technology Transfer (KTT platforms) were introduced. NTNs help establish contacts between businesses and public research institutes. Following a multi-stage assessment procedure in 2012, eight national thematic networks were recognised by the CTI: ‘Carbon Composites Switzerland’, ‘Inartis’, Inno-vative Surfaces’, ‘Swiss Biotech’, ‘Swiss Food Research’, ‘Swiss Wood Innovation Network’, ‘Swissphotonics’ and ‘Logistics Network Association’.

b. Harmonise policies for public e-infrastructures and associated digital research services

The SWITCH foundation is the Swiss partner in the Géant Project and is connected to a number of important international internet organisations where there are particularly close links with DANTE, which operates the European research network. Furthermore, the Swiss National Grid Association SwiNG collaborates with the European Grid Initiative (EGI) . This collaboration is also reflected by the participation of SwiNG in the FP7 project  „EGI-InSPIRE“.

Federated electronic identities

Switzerland participates in the STORK 2.0 project that aims to take further steps for wider uptake of eID in Europe.

Turkey

Priority: More effective national systems

Research and Innovation structure

The most important change in the political context and the Research and Innovation (R&I) structure is the establishment of Ministry of Science, Innovation and Technology (MoSIT) which replaces the existing Ministry of Industry and Trade (MoIT) with a decree law published in the Official Gazette on 3 June 2011. The science, technology and innovation-related duties of the MoSIT are defined as the development, implementation and coordination of the S&T and innovation policies, and the promotion of the R&D and innovation projects, activities and investments. All main actors in the system, including the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and the Turkish Academy of Science, are connected to the MoSIT. The Turkish Patent Institute (TPE), the National Metrology Institute (UME), the Turkish Accreditation Agency (TURKAK),the Turkish Academy of Science (TUBA) and the Turkish Standards Institute (TSE) which are government institutions related to R&D polices, are also affiliated to the MoSIT[19].

The recent amendment promulgated in TUBITAKs legislation[20] in July 2012, aims to increase the functionality of TUBITAK in commercialization of R&D output in TUBITAK’s research centres. Moreover, the amendments aim also at supporting venture capital funds[21].

National strategy for R&I

The National Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy 2011-2016 adopted in December 2010 by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology (BTYK) focuses on human resources development for science, technology and innovation, transformation of research outputs into products and services and enhancing interdisciplinary research, highlighting the role of SMEs, R&D infrastructures and international cooperation[22].

Furthermore, the new decisions taken on the 24th BTYK held in August 2012  focus on increasing the quality of primary and secondary education, restructuring of abroad graduate scholarship programmes,  of university entrance system and on the preparation towards participation to Horizon 2020. Furthermore, two additional decisions related to the previous ones were taken, namely the establishment of a coordination committee for integrity, harmonization and target orientation in R&D, innovation and entrepreneurship support mechanisms and improvement of public procurements to support innovativeness. The new decisions of the 25th BTYK are focused mainly on the e-government related issues. Furthermore, health becomes a priority area in S&T policies[23].

R&I funding

Between 2000 and 2011, Turkey's total gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) has increased by more than 10 times on TL basis reaching €4,535m (TL11,154m) in 2011 according to the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). In 2010, GERD was €4,657.08 (TL9,267m). GERD/GDP ratio which is around 0.85 in 2010-2011. One of the reasons is Turkey's is the higher GDP growth rate. The average GDP growth rate between the last two years (2011-2012) is 8.85%. In order to increase the GERD/GDP, the growth rate of GERD should be higher than the GDP growth rate. Also, another reason is that the increase in GDP is not correlated with an increase in GERD.. In Turkey, higher education institutions (HEIs) still have higher share in performing R&D. 46% of R&D is done by HEIs in Turkey

The government earmarked an amount of €1.2b[24] (TL2.8b) for funding R&D in 2013[25].The 2023 national R&D targets were set  during the 23rd BTYK meeting held  on the  27th of  December 2011 . The main R&D objective for 2023 is to reach the 3 % of GDP which is set by the Lisbon/Barcelona objectives. Moreover, the goal for the business R&D expenditures is to increase 2% of GDP. The target for the FTE researchers is to increase their number to 300,000 and for to private sector, to 180,000.

In 2011, 45.8% of R&D expenditures were funded by business enterprises, 29.2% by government sector, 20.8% by higher education sector, 3.4% by other national sources and 0.7% by foreign funds[26].

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

Turkish STI Policy and instruments have been recently reformed in order to reach national economic and social targets and gain competitiveness at international arena. Existing implementation mechanisms are being revised and new tools are being developed in order to increase the knowledge production and utilization capacity of Turkish Research Area (TRA) in general terms. Mainly Turkish STI policy aims to strengthen the institutional and legal structure of National Innovation System (NIS) to achieve its well-functioning as the initial step of the reform process in Turkey. A more competitive and performance based approach is built upon those attempts. In this vein, research funding modalities are also being revised in order to increase efficiency of the funding allocated to research and to utilize research results for social and technological problems Turkey faces.

Project-based funding in the country

Both institutional and project-based funding is available for universities and public R&D centres. For project-based funding, universities and public R&D centers apply to the programmes carried out by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK). These programmes finance ‘bottom-up’/ ‘free funding’ projects. Nearly half of the state funding is allocated for competitive programmes. In 2011, nearly 37% of the state budget for R&D was allocated to project-based subsidies, while 25% was earmarked for public research institutes and 38% was allocated for universities (BTYK 23, 2011).

Use of core principles of international peer review

For the assessment of the projects TUBITAK uses external experts. The main selection criteria include the quality of the scientific, technological and economic aspects of the project; quality of the project planning, and quality of the applicant. External national experts are appointed for the assessment of the projects. With similar selection criteria, KOSGEB applicants are assessed by external experts together with experts from KOSGEB[27].

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

In this respect, there is a shift to competitive, target based, thematic approach in funding research. Traditionally TÜBİTAK follows a bottom up model in funding research; research groups who meet the criteria receive funding. Within competitive approach, new Research and Innovation funding programmes are launched; those are mission-oriented, thematic ones targeted to produce solutions to specific social and technological problems. They are opened in some prioritized topics such as electrical vehicles, mechatronics, energy storage, solar energy, coal technologies, underground water, erosion, and desertification. Competitive approach aims to fund the best research groups in those thematic, mission oriented, newly launched programmes. Funding goes to groups offering best methodologies and solutions as identified in the call topic. Those targeted calls also aim to enhance/realize coordination among previously funded R&D projects in Turkey.

Participation of international experts to evaluation panels is both legally and practically open and perceived as critical to assess the international competitiveness and novelty of the research and innovation projects. Peer reviews for allocating project-based funding may be carried out by national and/or international experts. TÜBİTAK can base funding decisions on the results of international peer review carried out by other organisations and those carried out under the responsibility of organizations other than hers. Thus international peer review process is both legally and practically accepted in the organization. Mostly the international peer review results are accepted while allocating national funds to ERA-NET projects, projects funded under JPIs and international S&T agreements. TÜBİTAK handles engagement of international experts as processes helping to carry towards internationalization and promotion of excellence at international standards. It helps to reach internationally accepted research norms, values, quality and it is deemed highly important for improving excellence in TRA.

For a more effective NIS, TÜBİTAK is planning a monitoring and impact assessment process concerning national research programmes. Those initiatives are directed towards elaborating and understanding the main results, output and in a broader perspective the impact of the research and innovation projects funded nationally. Impact assessment studies are designed to provide feedback for revising the existing mechanisms and devising new tools and policies for better results. Thus, it is believed to increase the efficiency of allocation of R&D funds. 

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

Implement joint research agendas

Framework Programmes (FPs) appear as the main tool for international cooperation in S&T. Turkey makes huge investments and efforts to make TRA actors exploit the benefits proposed by FPs such as networking, knowledge and technology transfer, joint innovation activities, access to new markets, etc. Other than FPs, TÜBİTAK carries out project based bilateral cooperation with 28 organizations from 24 countries, and it is in cooperation with 90 global and regional organizations through specific S&T agreements by the end of 2013.[28]

Moreover, between the years 2007-2012 TÜBİTAK participated in total 41 ERA-NETs in which 107 Turkish institutions participated through around 15.6 Million €. In 2012, 7.4 Million € are spent through bilateral cooperation and ERA-NETs which makes approximately 0.12% of R&D expenditure realized in 2012. Turkey participates in 9 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) except Cultural Heritage JPI. Turkey also participates to Article 185 initiatives namely; Eurostars and EMPIR on European research on metrology in FP7 and its participation continues under Horizon 2020.[29]

Strategic Research Agendas SRAs are implemented jointly with JPI partners and joint research priorities are built within ERA-NETs and Article 185 initiatives. Common funding and evaluation principles applied in ERA-NET, JPIs and Article 185 initiatives together with partner countries add on further enhancement of cooperation among researchers from applicant countries.

Turkey is represented in European Research Area Committee (ERAC) and its subcommitees as High Level Group for Joint Programming (GPC), Strategic Forum for International cooperation (SFIC), Knowledge Transfer Group, Steering Group For Human Resources and Mobility (SGHRM).

Besides, COST and EUREKA are critical tools for international cooperation in STI. Turkish research actors participate to 194 ongoing COST[30] actions and have 44 EUREKA projects and Turkey ranked as 4th most successful country out of 32 countries in EUREKA due to the statistics by the end of 2013. Turkey also participated to other cooperation programmes and activities like European Space Agency (ESA), European Molecular Biology Conference (EMBC), Black Sea Economic Cooperation, NATO, OECD, etc.

FPs and other international cooperation activities have the potential to contribute to structural reform process. Possibility to share best practices, enable policy learning, learn new methodologies in funding and evaluation processes. ERA-NETs and JPIs provide a valuable basis for programme and policy level coordination and learning. Thus, TÜBİTAK attach importance to those kind of collaboration possibilities especially with European partners.

Priority: Research Infrastructures

Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

Research Infrastructures gradually gained weight in Turkish STI Policy agenda parallel to the encompassing reform process in recent years. Strategy of funding and developing Research Infrastructures (RIs) is mainly dealt with Development Plans.

During the Nineth Development Plan period from 2007-2013, a 2.4 billion TL (around 1 billion €) is spent for development of research infrastructures in universities and public bodies in priority technology areas identified by the above mentioned Development Plan and Supreme Council for Science and Technology. Currently there are 108 research infrastructures activated, 65 thematic RIs are being developed, and 97 advanced research center projects are underway. Those research centers are mainly on the areas of materials science, life sciences including biotechnology, aviation and space, information and communication technologies, defence industry and nanotechnology. On the other hand, research center laboratories are accomplished in 20 universities and in 62 university laboratories are being developed in order to enhance research capacity of universities.[31]

Ministry of Development is working on ESFRI Roadmap in order to build linkage between nationally funded Research Infrastructures and the platform. There is also an on-going preparation for ERIC regulation in Turkey.

Under the Research Infrastructures scheme of the 7th Framework Programme (FP7) 38 projects are funded from which Turkish partners could get 8.8 million € 300 researchers from Turkey could get access to leading European research infrastructures and 12 research institutes did get 10.9 million € direct infrastructure and capacity building support under Research Potential (RegPot) Programme.[32]

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

Open, transparent and merit based recruitment of researchers

According to the Council of Higher Education (HEC) regulations, all open research positions in public universities must be announced on the website of the universities at least 15 days prior to the application deadline[33].

TÜBITAK is the EURAXESS Network coordinator in Turkey. Interested researchers can find online information[34] regarding accommodation, day care and schooling, intellectual property rights, language courses, recognition of qualifications, salaries and taxation, social and cultural aspects, social security, pension rights and healthcare, visas and work permits[35].

Although Charter and Code (C&C) is not binding for Turkey, in the light of integration with Europe, C&C principles are applied in most of the institutionalized research organizations in their recruitment process.

A new legal arrangement is realized to enable foreign researchers or experts to easily come, get residence permit and work in Turkey for certain periods of time for projects funded under European Union Programmes. This special residence permit rescues researchers from red tape to apply for a work permit and facilitates the process for researchers coming to Turkey in EU funded projects including Framework Programmes.

To support brain gain, TÜBİTAK also put in use new research funding and fellowship programmes similar to Marie Curie funds. This national programme is specially targeted to Turkish researchers in USA, Japan, Canada and other countries and became very successful in bringing these researchers to TRA, thus ERA. Under this programme “2232-Brain (Incoming Research Fellowships for Turkish Citizens) additional financial support provided to researchers besides their salaries for 4 years, those returned to Turkey from abroad.  

TÜBİTAK also launched a new process with universities, academic organizations and leading industrial organizations to attract researchers from USA, Canada and Japan. Leading Research institutes in Turkey are negotiated to create job opportunities for qualified Turkish researchers in those developed countries. TÜBİTAK demands those kinds of job advertisements in every three months and shares job opportunities with the targeted researchers. Currently an online platform is being prepared to widely distribute those kinds of job opportunities to a wider community. Platform will be finalized at the end of this year. It will greatly enhance the brain gain process for TRA.  

In order to strengthen quantitatively and qualitatively the human potential in research and technology in Turkey, the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) encourages researchers worldwide to come and visit the Turkish Research Area.

To achieve the aim of making Turkey more attractive for top researchers, TÜBİTAK provides various fellowships as well as coordinating the dissemination of EU Framework Programmes funds. Moreover, Research Performing Organizations including, Universities, Research Institutes and Industrial Organizations located in Turkey provides special research positions only for the researchers having international research experience. 

This website, giving information about the “National and European Funding Mechanisms”, presents attractive research vacancies for researchers, living and conducting active research abroad,  who wish to be integrated into the Turkish Research Area, to spend his/her sabbatical in Turkey, to spend the summer in Turkey,  or to collaborate with Turkish Research Area.

With the help of this online platform, researchers looking for a position or a fellowship will reap the benefit of being able to find them in a proper portal as well as the Research Performing Organizations will take advantage of this website, by publishing vacancies for the specific research group who has international research experience.

In FP7 Marie Curie Programme 293 project could get 38.9 million € from Turkey. Those projects helped to build career perspectives for researchers, enhance their intellectual capabilities and international visibilities. Through FPs, international agreements or brain circulation activities, internationalization in R&D is perceived as a profound process to enhance national STI capabilities, reach to global knowledge and provide access to networks and follow up latest technological developments. Internationalization in STI mostly with Europe attached great importance to reach national economic and social objectives in mid to long term.[36] 

Researchers careers

According to TURKSTAT (2012), 58% of researchers are employed in universities, 33% in the private sector and 9% in government.[37].

Turkey has bilateral social security agreements with 21 countries. Citizens of countries which have signed social security agreement with Turkey based on the principle of reciprocity can certify that they are subject to insurance in their own country[38].

Cross-border access to and portability of national grants

In the past, foreign researchers conducting projects funded by TÜBITAK were at a disadvantage compared to Turkish researchers, as they were not entitled to obtain the ‘Project Incentive Bonus’. The relevant regulation was recently amended[39].

Support mobility between private and public sector

The support schemes for incoming; outgoing and reintegration fellows are coordinated in TÜBİTAK by BİDEB (The Science Fellowships and Grant Programmes Department). BİDEB implemented more than 25 science fellowships and grant schemes for research careers. Nearly half of these Programmes are national grants for Turkish citizens. Within these programmes, undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral studies of the researchers and scientific events are supported by TÜBİTAK.

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

National policies do not address specifically the gender equality in research. Therefore, there are no direct support programmes for the gender equality, nor a special set of rules for regulating the working conditions of female researchers.

Priority: Knowledge circulation

Open access for publications and data resulting from publicly funded research

Turkish Academy network and Information Center (ULAKBİM) under TÜBİTAK aims to build research and education networks among research organizations and universities, and enable linkage of those institutes with their national and international counterparts. It aims to provide information technologies support as well as necessary documentary services including access to knowledge to foster production of scientific knowledge in Turkey. TÜBİTAK provides digital services as scientific publications repository, research data repository  and computing services. Some of the scientific publications provided by TÜBİTAK is available online and free of charge and the institution also makes research data online and free of charge.

ULAKNET

The Turkish Academic Network and Information Centre (ULAKBİM) was founded as a R&D Facility Institute in 1996. ULAKBİM’s main objectives have been set as operating a high speed computer network enabling interaction within the institutional elements of the national innovation system, and providing information technology support and information services to help scientific production. ULAKBIM consists of National Academic Network (ULAKNET) Unit, which undertakes the task of formation and operation of research and education network infrastructure in Turkey. The number of users of ULAKNET has reached to approximately 3 million in 2012.[40]

Cahit Arf Information Center (CABİM)

Cahit Arf Information Center provides information and document delivery services nationwide, using traditional and electronic means, in order to meet the information needs of academia, public and industrial sectors, and to contribute to the production of scientific information in Turkey. In 2012, approximately 125.000 people benefitted from the services of the Center.[41]

To create equal opportunity of access to academic information resources for researchers within Turkey, TÜBİTAK EKUAL (Electronic Resources National Academic Licence) Project is implemented in the center. Within this project 17.739 electronic journals are accessed from databases together with 51 million bibliographical records and 1.2 million conference proceedings etc.[42]

Turkish National e-Science e-Infrastructure (TRUBA)

Turkish National e-Science e-Infrastructure (TRUBA) Strengthening Project mainly aims to meet the needs of researchers who carry out the studies in Turkey, ongoing national and international projects on high performance computing, distributed computing and scientific data warehouse. The project is the continuation of the developed project TR-Grid Research e-Infrastructure Strengthening (TR-Grid ReIS). During this project, administrative and technical motivation which was generated in TR-Grid ReIS project will be maintained increasingly and TRUBA computing and storage resources for national researchers will be increased to be equivalent as resources available at few centers in Europe. In 2010, this e-infrastructure provided services to 78 different public institutions.[43]

Open innovation (OI) and knowledge transfer (KT) between public and private sectors

In 2012, TÜBİTAK launched a programme[44] which offers grants of up to 1 million TL per year to universities to encourage them to establish new Technology Transfer Offices (TTO) and to develop existing ones. The programme aims to facilitate collaboration between universities and industrial enterprises and allow industry to benefit from new information-based technologies. The TTOs supported under the programme receive a grant of up to 1 million TL per year from TÜBİTAK. Based on results of yearly evaluations, the support period can be extended up to 10 years. The scope of the grant covers personnel expenses, transportation, subsistence and accommodation costs, tools, equipment, software, purchase of publications, service fees, meetings, presentations and organisational expenses, certified financial consultancy fees, and general expenses.

ERA Progress Report 2014 SERBIA

Priority: More effective national systems

Research and Innovation structure

The Serbian research system consists of three operational levels. The first level of governance and the highest legislative authority is the Serbian National Parliament. The Committee for Science and Technological Development (Nacionalni komitet za naučni I tehnološki razvoj) is in charge of proposing laws that regulate the area of science, technology and innovation. At the ministerial level, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (Ministarstvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja - MESTD) governs the functioning and development of science and technology in Serbia. 

The National Agency for the Regional Development (NARD) and Innovation Fund (IF) of the Republic of Serbia are to a limited extent also relevant innovation policy institutions, although their main activities are in funding innovation activities on the operational level.

Policy formulation and implementation institutions include the National Council for Science and Technological Development (NCS) and the National Council of Higher Education (NCHE) which are the highest advisory bodies in their respective fields.

The operational level consists of intermediary and funding organisations. Research performers are private and public research organisations in the government, higher education and the business enterprise sector. R&D organisations in the public sector form a block which comprises seven public universities with 78 faculties, the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts with its 10 scientific institutes, 28 other scientific institutes, a centre of scientific excellence, 30 research institutes, 65 innovative organisations, five business associations for support of innovation and 107 registered innovators. It also includes scientific and technical infrastructure that encompasses: the academic intranet, a gene bank, an accelerator, libraries of the institutes and faculties, the University Library and the National Library of Serbia, which boasts the KoBSON network that provides access to scientific and technological information worldwide. R&D organisations in the private sector include seven private universities with 45 faculties, research resources of foreign companies in Serbia and research and innovation resources of domestic firms.

The Science Law as well as the Innovation Law in the Republic of Serbia defined MESTD as the main and the only governing institution in the country, responsible for R&D and Innovation activities. Research governance was transferred to the level of Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (APV) to a limited extent, as it was defined by the law on the regulation of jurisdictions of the APV, adopted by the Parliament of the Republic of Serbia on November 30, 2009. According to this regulation, the creation of the Strategy for technological development of the APV must be harmonized with the national S&T strategy. Additionally, (co)funding for establishment of high-tech installation, building homes for young scientists, and for international S&T cooperation, as well as (co)funding of R&D activities was regulated. The law introduced a definition and enabled funding of programmes important for APV in the area of S&T and regulated the establishment of the innovation fund based on local revenues, as well as establishment of local R&D centres and popularization of S&T activities. Finally, the law directed financial support to the Academy of Sciences and Arts of the APV.

National strategy for R&I

The Strategy for Scientific and Technological Development 2010-2015 is the key policy document which provides a vision of scientific and technological development for the Republic of Serbia by defining four main points: focus, partnership, innovation and investments. Measures for implementation of the Strategy are specified in the corresponding action plan. The main framework of the strategy encompasses focus and cooperation, thus with these two main topics the government wants to regulate S&T nation focus and priority areas and encourage cooperation on the national and international level in different aspects (i.e. universities, knowledge transfers, industry-academia collaboration, joint research endeavours, etc.). The restructuring of the public R&D system together with harmonised efforts toward recognition and integration of the business R&D sector into the national innovation system is a key objective of government strategy for S&T development in the Republic of Serbia until 2015.

Another important document for the scientific and technological development is the Strategy for Higher Education 2020. Additionally, a new Strategy for Scientific and Technological Development for the period 2016-2020 titled “Research for Innovation 2020” is in preparation.

R&I funding

The Government budget appropriations or an outlay for research and development (GBAORD) as a share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was 0.34 per cent in 2013. This percentage has increased to 0.5 per cent through additional investment of credit funds in infrastructure and scientific and research equipment, donations and IPA funds. The ambitious 2015 target, set by the Strategy, to reach a 1.05 per cent of GDP will not be achieved. The adjusted 2015 target is 0.56 per cent of GDP.

The Serbian budget allocations for science grew significantly, from the sum of €28m in 2001, to about €100m in 2008 and 2009. During that eight-year period, there was a substantial growth in salaries of researchers, and almost €30m were invested in capital equipment for scientific research work (SSTDRS, 2010). The Project of Infrastructural Investments, worth EUR 400 million started in January 2010 and will last until the end of 2015 (SSTDRS, 2010). According to the data provided by the national statistical office, in 2011 the share of higher education sector expenditures for Research and Development (HERD) was 56.71 per cent of GERD (24.14 per cent in EU27), much higher than the BERD share (9.38 per cent) of GERD (62.07 per cent in EU27). Governmental expenditure for R&D was 33.77 per cent (12.81 per cent in EU27), whereas the private non-profit (PNP) sector amounted to 0.13 per cent, a negligible share of GERD in the same year (0.99 per cent in the EU27).

Despite the economic crisis, the overall public R&D expenditure in Serbia has been increasing over the past years. The biggest jump was seen in 2011 when the budgetary allocations increased by 22 per cent in comparison with 2010, following the government obligations which are the research infrastructure through financial agreements with the European Investment Bank and the Council of Europe Development Bank with a total value of €305m to be implemented in 2010-2015.

Investments in R&D and innovation in Serbia from public sources are prioritised and budgeted in the framework of multi-annual plans. Project financing is based on open competition for R&D and Innovation projects. There is no institutional, or block funding for R&D activities in Serbia.

The main challenge for funding research in Serbia in 2014 is increasing the R&D and innovation activity in the business enterprise sector (BES). Official figures show that BERD share in GERD in 2012 was only 24.97 per cent, which is very low compared to the EU average of 62.96. R&D activities in the Higher Education Sector are mostly financed from the government budget (69.51 per cent in 2012), with a small share from the industry (only 2.51 per cent) and surprisingly small share of financing from abroad (3.12 per cent in 2012 compared to 11.27 per cent in 2008). The private-non-profit sector makes the smallest contribution to R&D and was estimated to be 0.06 per cent in 2012.

Competitive funding through calls for proposals applying the core principles of international peer review

On the country level, there is no official information about the budget allocations of the MESTD budget. According to the yearly reports of the MESTD half of the budget share in 2009 was allocated to basic research and a 39.1 per cent was spent on applied research. Small proportions of 5.1 per cent and 5.3 per cent were distributed to developing human resources in science and international cooperation. Data for the more recent years are not yet available.

Project-based funding in the country

Investments in R&D and innovation in Serbia from public sources are prioritised and budgeted in the framework of multi-annual plans to ensure predictability and long-term impact. Project financing based on open competition for R&D and Innovation projects is decade’s long practice in Serbia. There is no institutional, or block funding for R&D activities in Serbia. Programmes for the support of R&D and innovation activities co-financed by the MESTD, the Ministry of Economy and Regional Development (MFE) and the National Agency for the Regional Development (NARD) are not sector-specific.

The allocation of public research funding is competitive and implemented through open calls for proposals (project-based funding). Independent experts, two international and one domestic for each proposal, carry out evaluation of research proposals. Peer review is based on transparent evaluation criteria communicated in advance including adherence to international principles, research team competence, excellence, impact, quality and efficiency of the project implementation.

The adoption of the national R&D strategy brought several changes in budgetary commitments. A new grant programme for interdisciplinary and integral research has been introduced, taking up almost a third of national R&D financing addressed to realisation of the R&D and Innovation projects. The programme is designed to bring together teams from different institutions in addressing Serbia’s R&D priorities.

Use of core principles of international peer review

There is no official data collected and calculated for GBAORD figures in Serbia. Figures used in different publications are estimations and calculations of experts and authors of different publications and reports. Calculations are based on the data provided by the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. For 2011 GBAORD as  per cent of GDP was 0.493 (EU average is 0.73), which is less than in 2009 (estimated 0.578 in ERAWATCH Country Reports 2012: Serbia, Kutlaca, 2014).

Institutional funding based on institutional assessment

There was no significant funding for innovation activities in Serbia from any source other than MESTD, MFE and NARD. Additional to this, there is neither institutional nor block funding for R&D activities in Serbia. Public universities have the access to institutional funding but only for teaching and not for R&D activities.

In 2011 financial scheme for supporting the Innovation fund activities was negotiated with the World Bank, the European Investment Bank, and the European Commission. Preliminary negotiations were estimated at a total sum of €75.5m for the period 2011-2014. Initial funding is provided through the Innovation Serbia Project with €8.4m (Component 2: Support Human Capital Development and Research) and it is funded by the EU pre-accession funds (IPA) allocated for Serbia in 2011, and implemented with expert support of the World Bank. The IPA project will provide funding for capacity building of the Innovation Fund and implementation of financial instruments supporting enterprise innovation (MINI GRANTS and MATCHING GRANTS Programmes) by the Innovation Fund. Public call for MINI GRANTS programme has been launched in December 5th, 2011. Public call for the MATCHING GRANTS programme is launched in spring 2012. The aims of the Innovation fund of Republic of Serbia include development of innovative enterprises, creation and development of innovation system in Serbia, which is of key significance in gaining competitiveness of the economic sector, and contributions to the overall awareness of the role of technological development and innovation.

Programmes for the support of R&D and innovation activities co-financed by the MESTD, the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MFE) and the National Agency for the Regional Development (NARD) are not sector-specific.

In the area of institutional assessment, two independent bodies are carrying out the evaluation procedures such as initial accreditation, re-accreditation and thematic evaluations. These are the Commission for Accreditation and Quality Assurance (CAQA), which is a member of ENQA (European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education), and the Commission for Accreditation of Research Institutions.

Priority: Transnational Cooperation

The most important instrument of transnational cooperation in the previous period was the Framework Program. Serbia has had the status of an associated country since 2007. Researchers from Serbia have achieved significant results in FP7 calls for proposals and, according to the latest statistics, participated in 317 projects of which 49 were SME grants. Achieved success rate was 15.2 per cent, which is lower than the EU average, but higher than in many of the countries in the Western Balkan (WB) region. Serbia expressed interest for association to Horizon 2020 and signed the Agreement with the European Union on July 1, 2014. Serbia participated in several ERA-NET Initiatives and is active in ERA governance bodies and in the FP Programme Committees.

Serbia participates in international large-scale research programmes and infrastructures, such as European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN). Serbian research groups are currently active in four CERN collaborations.

Serbia conducts international cooperation through bilateral and multilateral programs such as COST, EUREKA, NATO, etc. At the moment more than 400 experienced and young Serbian researchers participate in over 170 COST actions in 10 Domains. There are 16 active Eureka projects, and so far Serbian researchers have participated in 84 Eureka projects overall, involving 172 organizations. Related to the NATO-SPS program, Serbian researchers are involved in 22 running projects.

Related to the regional initiatives, Serbia has actively participated in the design of a Regional Strategy aiming at strengthening R&I cooperation at regional level with its Balkan neighbours.

Serbia has signed bilateral agreements for scientific cooperation with almost all WB countries and other EU countries. Serbian researchers are involved in 228 bilateral projects with 10 countries.

Implement joint research agendas

The Serbian Ministry has recognised the need and is working towards ensuring an adequate supply of human resources for research and an open, attractive and competitive labour market for male and female researchers.

Joint research

Bilateral cooperation is implemented with a number of countries including Germany, Hungary, France, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Switzerland and Italy. In 2011 a call for S&T cooperation was launched with number of countries such as Spain, Portugal, Greece (new cycle), China, India, Croatia, Switzerland. Additional to that, framework agreements were drawn up with several other countries such as Austria, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Spain, Russia, and the USA.

FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

i. Joint programming initiatives

Serbia participates in several international programmes, including 11 Framework Programme Seventh projects, COST, Eureka, NATO Science for Peace and Security and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

ii. ERA-Nets

Serbia participates in six ERA-nets, two of which are currently active. Serbia is a partner on ERA-CAPS: ERA-NET for Coordinating Action in Plant Sciences, started in 2011 with expected end in November 2014, and SAFERA: Coordination of European Research on Industrial Safety towards Smart and Sustainable Growth, from 2012 to 2015.

The network that ended include EUPHRESCO: European Phytosanitary Research Coordination II (2011-2014), SEE-ERA.NET: South East European ERA-NET (2004-2009), SEE-ERA.NET Plus: South East European ERA-NET Plus – joint call for European Research projects in September 2009 in order to enhance the integration of the Western Balkan countries into the European Research Area (2009-20013), and SEERA-EI: South East European Research Area for eInfrastructures (2009-2012).

INTEROPERABILITY, MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF EVALUATION RESULTS AND OTHER SCHEMES

Serbia recognised the need to create and improve evaluation standards and principles as this was identified as one among the key challenges R&D and Innovation system. The instruments and mechanisms were also described as obsolete, making the internal system less credible. Work has been done with that regard. The accreditation procedure is obligatory for R&D, HE and registered innovation organisation: under the HE Law, for teaching competence: under the Science Law, for R&D competence; under the Innovation Law for innovation capacity.

Orientation on foreign programmes and projects (EU, WB, OECD, etc.) for support of innovation activities in the Republic of Serbia is acknowledged by the domestic governing institutions, but there is still work to be invested in harmonising the national innovation performance, priorities, needs and challenges with goals and activities of these international projects.

Priority: Research Infrastructures

Serbia is a member of ESFRI and participates in two ERICs. In order to provide a strategic approach and policy support, it is planned to define a national Roadmap on Research Infrastructures as a part of IPA2013 project "Support to Innovation and Technology Transfer in Serbia" which also includes development of the National Strategy “Research for Innovation 2020''. Through landing operations with EIB and CEB, Serbia has initiated significant investments in scientific equipment and infrastructure in support of R&I activities, such as the formation of Science and Technology Parks in university centres, establishment of Centres of Excellence, support for the Centre for talented pre-university students in Petnica, and the Centre for the Promotion of Science.

Under the Science and Innovation Law (2010), all research institutions in Serbia are obliged to acquire an accreditation. This requirement was set in order to improve the quality and excellence of knowledge production. The accreditation process is mandatory requirement for all organizations, institutions and companies that intended to apply for government support for R&D activities.

Serbia has 2 centres of excellence. The Centre for Mathematical Research of Nonlinear Phenomena is a research unit at the Department of Mathematics and Informatics, at the Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad. The other one is the Centre for Solid State Physics and New Materials of the Institute of Physics Belgrade. Centres of excellence have for it main aim to act as disseminators of excellence in their surroundings and to contribute to the development of society and economy in Serbia. The future development should see opening of several new centres of excellence, as well as the creation and support of excellent research institutions engaged in effective public-private cooperation and partnerships, which will form the core of research and innovation 'clusters'.

One of the great challenges for Serbia is working towards the full utilisation of the research as well as full connectedness of the research and development with the social surroundings. The aims to that end are to have the Universities and research institutions embedded in the social and economic life where they are based, while competing and cooperating across Europe and beyond.

Another structural challenge that Serbian R&D and innovation landscape faces is the undeveloped infrastructure for innovative entrepreneurship and lack of culture for technological entrepreneurship in the higher education sector and public R&D laboratories and institutes (PRO – Public Research Organisations). Crucial steps forward in order to create an environment to support technological entrepreneurship are the changes in HE Law and Innovation Law that will stimulate and legally approve creation of university and PROs spin-offs. There are just few examples of spin-offs initiatives, such as within University of Novi Sad - Faculty of Technical Sciences and Mihajlo Pupin Institute in Belgrade. Until 2010 there are two only Technology Transfer Offices established in Serbia, one at the University of Novi Sad and the other at University of Belgrade. Since then, University of Niš opened a Centre for Technology Transfer to help in commercialisation of the research results, and University of Kragujevac developed a Centre for Knowledge Transfer with an overall objective to identify, protect and exploit intellectual gains of the science community. There are several science and technology parks that are in different projecting and development phases (such as the ones in Zvezdara, Zemun, Inđija. Vršac).

Overall assessment is that most of the private HE institutions are so-called “teaching” faculties/universities, with transmission of knowledge (teaching) as primary and only activity. Other two main missions: generation of new knowledge (research) and the 'third mission' (contribution to local or regional wealth and economic development) are mostly present in some of public HE institutions (ERA Serbia report, p.22).

9. Financial commitments for the construction and operation of ESFRI, national, regional Research infrastructures of pan-European interest

MESTD announced a plan for other investments in R&D in Serbia in the period 2010-2015. The main sources of financing of the infrastructural projects which demonstrate and enable development of priority research fields in the next five years will be international financial institutions, and particularly the European Investment Bank, European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank, Development Bank of the Council of Europe and various international donors, specifically EU pre-accession funds.

The Project of infrastructural investments, worth €400m started in January 2011 and will last until the end of 2015. Projects selected for this investment were those conducive to the development of priority disciplines, likely to ensure successful development and identification of scientific talent, prevent brain drain, and finally, projects which will make up for almost twenty years of scarce investment into scientific infrastructure. Main projects within the “Serbian R&D infrastructure investment initiative” are (SSTDRS, 2010):

· Serbian R&D infrastructure investment initiative comprises investments in upgrading existing capacities, for adaptation of existing buildings and laboratories and new capital equipment for research (app. €70m);

· Development of Excellence centre and academic research centres (app. €60m);

· Development of ICT infrastructure, for Campus for faculties of technical sciences of the University in Belgrade and Infrastructure for supercomputing initiative "Blue Danube" (app. €30m to €80m);

· Creation of a knowledge-based economy through the construction of science parks in Belgrade, Novi Sad, Nis and Kragujevac (app. €30m);

· Basic infrastructure projects, such as apartment buildings for researchers in Belgrade, Novi Sad, Nis and Kragujevac (app. €80m).

a. Participation in the development and operation of EIROs

Serbia has an industrial relations country profile on EIROnline database (http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/country/serbia_1.htm). 

b. Participation in the development and operation of Research Infrastructures included in the ESFRI Roadmap

Serbia has signed a Memorandum of Understanding in 2006 for DARIAH – Digital Infrastructure to Study Materials in Cultural Heritage Institutions.

c. Participation in ERICs

Serbia is a part of CERIC-ERIC. The specific scope of this ERIC concerns the offer as an integrated service to external researchers of the access to synchrotron light and other microscopic probes for analytical and modification techniques notably for materials preparation and characterization, structural investigations and imaging in Life Sciences, Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Cultural Heritage, Environment and Materials Sciences and to their various technological and industrial outcomes ranging from energy to biomedical and of interest to most manufacturing industries.

Access to Research Infrastructures of pan-European interest

There is no specific regulation to facilitate the integration of foreign researchers in the national research labour market, such as social security access, health insurance, compatibility of pension schemes, etc.

Priority: Open labour markets for researchers

In 2014 the number of researchers full time equivalent (FTE) in relation to the total number of employees was 5.4 per 1000, while the number of new doctoral graduates is 0,19 per 1000 inhabitants.

From the legislative point of view, labour market in Serbia is open and recruitment process is transparent. In practice, open positions are often not published in a centralized way, but rather in local newspapers or institutional web sites in Serbian language. Serbian EURAXESS job portal is fully operational and ready to accept open positions data.

Five research and higher education institutions have signed the Declaration of Commitment to the Principles of the Researchers Charter and Code, out of which one was granted with the European Commission logo for the ‘HR Excellence in Research’.

National grants and fellowships for researchers and PhD students are not open to non-residents. National funded grants or fellowships are not portable to other countries. However, there are special calls dedicated to foreign nationals. In 2013, the Ministry for Education, Science and Technological Development granted 29 scholarships for foreign postdoctoral students and support for 120 students and professors for international inter-university collaboration. In order to accelerate the acceptance of foreign researchers the procedure for faster recognition of foreign diploma or training qualifications has been implemented.

In 2013 MESTD funded participation of 4,177 young researchers in national projects, and additionally provided 596 scholarships for doctoral training programmes.

A great challenge for the Serbian scientific community is the extensive brain drain and ageing of research population. This issue in placed highly on the agenda and it is planned for the new Strategy to tackle these problems.

Priority: Gender balance and gender contents in research

Serbia made a significant step toward improving the status of women. A set of legal and policy documents was adopted: Law on Gender Equality (adopted 11th December 2009), National Strategy for Improved Status of Women and Gender Equality Promotion (adopted 13th February 2009) and the Action Plan for Implementation of the National Strategy for Improved Status of Women and Gender Equality Promotion, for the period 2010-2015 (adopted on 26th August 2010).

In 2008 the Gender Equality Directorate is established within the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Republic of Serbia. Directorate provided trainings to the employees in civil service for the implementation of gender equality principle into programs, plans and operation of state institutions as well as program development and training for media representatives. Additionally, Directorate implemented various projects topics relevant for gender equality (the combat against sexual and gender-based violence, Project inception, Programme for implementation of NAP priority activities). Moreover, Directorate is involved in analysis of the gender dimensions of textbooks (from primary school to university), organizing conferences and debates on issues of gender equality, support the collection and presentation of gender analysis.

There are no special regulations for career breaks (i.e. parental leave) and this applies for any sector not only R&D. Restoration of the same position is guaranteed by the law and a fixed-term contract must be extended due to maternity leave.

Priority: Knowledge circulation

The Serbian Government encourages Open Access (OA) to the results of publicly funded research. Leading R&D actors support the principle of OA described in the Berlin Declaration, e.g. University of Belgrade has signed the Berlin Declaration in November 2011.

Serbia has an active scientific publishing environment. Most of 400 active national professional journals have accepted OA as the publishing model. Full texts are available from Digital Repository of National Library of Serbia, where digital forms of all issues are deposited. Eight data repositories exist in Serbia, containing 10,200 deposited items, out of which 2,503 have OA.

The new Law on Higher Education, currently in the adoption process, will stipulate mandatory OA to all PhD theses promoted in Serbian universities. Several universities already have such repositories, such as Digital Archive of the University of Belgrade, PHAIDRA.

Regarding knowledge transfer between public and private sector, MESTD supports the creation and development of new small and medium-sized innovative companies, business incubators, science and technology parks, centers for technology transfer, organization for the encouragement of innovation activities in the priority areas of science and technology, research and development centres, innovation centres and technology companies.

Legal framework for innovation activities in Serbia is provided by the Law on Innovation Activity (Official Gazette RS, no 110/05, 18/10 and 55/13) and bylaws. The law regulates framework for formation of organizations for support of innovation activities and technology transfer centers. By this Law the Register of Innovative Companies was established, as well as the Innovation Fund. The main goal of the Innovation Fund is to encourage innovations and the provision of funding for innovation activities, primarily through cooperation with international financial institutions, organizations, donors and private sector. Currently, the Fund is implementing IPA 2011 Innovation Serbia project. A new IPA 2013 - Support for Innovation and Technology Transfer in Serbia project is under preparation.

Additionally, during the last 10 years, MESTD has been supporting The Best Technological Innovation Competition, in cooperation with the University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, the Intellectual Property Office of the Republic of Serbia, and the national Public TV broadcasting company.

In the area of intellectual property rights MESTD, in cooperation with the Intellectual Property Office, prepares and sends to the Government draft legislation on intellectual property rights, or suggested by-laws in this area. The Government has approved Strategy of the Intellectual Property Development for the period of 2011 to 2015 with the corresponding action plan.

The most developed public e-infrastructure in Serbia is Serbian NREN (AMRES), which operates as a separate legal entity since 2010. The network infrastructure is fully integrated into the GEANT network, complying with the GEANT architecture and common services (such as eduroam). At the policy level AMRES, has, in 2014, developed Membership Agreement and Technical Service Agreement providing well defined framework for further collaboration with clear definition of obligations and responsibilities of all parties.

AMRES is responsible for development and operation of identity federation at the national level, which is already identified as one of the basic infrastructure for advanced digital services including further e-Science services. The existing AMRES infrastructure already supports eduroam federation with 41 connected institutions as Identity Providers (the biggest universities and faculties).

The most popular digital research service is KoBSON, which provides free academic access to scientific journals. It provides access to more than 35.000 scientific journals, 90.000 electronic books and its available 24/7. Also, on KoBSON website users can find links to books and journals from OA services like: DOAB (1614 titles), DOAJ (9967 journals), OAPEN books, FreeBooks4Doctors, CLC Disease Management Project etc.

The work on Web SSO (Single Sign-On) federation is continued through GEANT project and eduGAIN activity. Two institutions are included in the local pilot project, while establishing a national policy is the next priority on the roadmap of integration into pan-European eduGAIN federation. Promotion and establishing of digital identities in individual institutions, acting as Identity providers, and its inclusion into identity federation is an ongoing activity.

[1] The Research Fund, the Infrastructure Fund and the Strategic Research Programme fall under the auspices of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture while the Technology Development Fund is administered by the Ministry of Industries and Innovation.

[2] The 2014 level of spending on R&D is 2,7% of GDP.

[3] http://eng.velferdarraduneyti.is/media/acrobat-enskar_sidur/Act-on-equal-status-and-equal-rights-of-women-and-men_no-10-2008.pdf

[4] http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/MRN-pdf/Jafnretti-i-haskolum-a-Islandi.pdf

[5] http://www.norden.org/en/publications/publikationer/2013-544

[6] Eurostat (2012): http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/R_%26_D_expenditure

[7]           UNINETT AS develops and operates the Norwegian national research and education network, a high-capacity computer network interconnecting about 200 Norwegian educational and research institutions and more than 300 000 users, as well as giving them access to international research networks.

[8] The Federal Departments are ‚super-ministries’ that encompass a number of so-called Offices and State Secretaries. Offices and State Secretaries are more like ministries in other countries.

[9] In 2013, the SNSF allocated slightly more than half (51%) of its funds to its main funding scheme, project funding, see http://www.snf.ch/SiteCollectionDocuments/por_fac_sta_kurz_jb13_e.pdf

[10] The acceptance of the mass immigration initiative on 9 February 2014 by Swiss voters has resulted in Switzerland being (temporarily) excluded from European research funding and led to non-association in the European research programme Horizon 2020. For the time being, Switzerland therefore has third country status in Horizon 2020.

[11] The acceptance of the mass immigration initiative on 9 February 2014 by Swiss voters has put the Swiss-EU Bilateral Agreement on Free Movement of Persons in question. The initative requires the re-introduction of fixed quotas for immigrants, and thus a suspension of the Free Movement of Persons.

[12] See footnote above

[13] http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/ services/researchPolicies

[14]   Available at: http://www.crus.ch/dms.php?id=6872, version of 17 January 2014.

[15] CTI Activity Report 2013,  http://www.kti.admin.ch/dokumentation/00077/index.html?lang=en

[16] http://www.snf.ch/en/researchinFocus/nrp/nrp60-gender-equality/Pages/default.aspx

[17] http://www.nfp60.ch/E/Pages/home.aspx

[18] While the SNSF received numerous positive responses from the research community with regard to its new publication funding model, it also received more critical feedback, mainly from the humanities. The latter feared that the new model would make it more difficult to have scientific books printed. In addition, publishing houses in the humanities and social sciences felt that it threatened their core task. As a result, the SNSF reviewed its new publication funding model and adjusted it in certain points. It now envisages slightly higher financial contributions for guaranteed publisher services and a pilot project with the publishers. With the slightly increased grants and lump sums for publications, the SNSF aims to accommodate the interests and needs of the humanities:

[19] Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr

[20] http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files//mevzuat/yonetmelik/KANUN_278_temmuz-2012.pdf

[21] Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr

[22] Ibid.

[23] Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr

[24] €1=TL2.3363 (Central Bank of Turkey’s effective sale rate for 30.10.2012)

[25] http://.www.tbmm.gov.tr/butce/2013/konusma_30_Ekim_2012.pdf

[26] Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr

[27] Turkey ERAWATCH Country Report 2012 http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/reports/countries/tr/report_0006?tab=reports&country=tr

[28] TÜBİTAK Database

[29] TÜBİTAK Database

[30] TÜBİTAK Database

[31] 10th Development Plan of Turkey (2014-2018), pp. 96, 97

[32] TÜBİTAK Database

[33] EURAXESS Turkey country profile http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Turkey_Country_Profile_RR2013_FINAL.pdf

[34] http://euraxess.tubitak.gov.tr/euraxess-turkey

[35] Ibid.

[36] TÜBİTAK Database

[37] EURAXESS Turkey country profile http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/pdf/research_policies/country_files/Turkey_Country_Profile_RR2013_FINAL.pdf

[38] Ibid.

[40] ULAKBİM Activity Report 2012: http://ulakbim.tubitak.gov.tr/sites/images/faaliyet_oz_12.pdf, p. 1.

[41] ULAKBİM Activity Report 2012: http://ulakbim.tubitak.gov.tr/sites/images/faaliyet_oz_12.pdf, p. 7

[42] Ibid., p. 8

[43] Ibid., p. 1

[44] http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/information/country_pages/tr/supportmeasure/support_0045?tab=template

Austria - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2473.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 10

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 294.2 || EUR 178.6 || 5

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 7

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.6 % || 1.4 % || 8

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 27 % || || 6

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 73 % || || 4

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.7 % || || 5

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Austria ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 65609 || 2545544 || 10

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 15.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 5

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 8.6 % || 24.2 % || 12

Source: Eurostat

|| Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 29 % || 33.2 % || 21

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 41.8 % || 47 % || 24

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 16.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 7

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Austria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.3 || 2.89 || 19

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 8

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 15

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.022 || 0.02 || 5

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Austria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Austria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 21.1 % || 21 || 39.6 % || 85.7 % || 12 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 51.1 % || 11 || 45.0 % || 10.6 % || 20 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 27.8 % || 5 || 15.4 % || 3.7 % || 7 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Belgium - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2489.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 9

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 224.4 || EUR 178.6 || 9

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 12

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.2 % || 1.4 % || 14

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 9.9 % || || 1

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Belgium ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 63207 || 2545544 || 11

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 8

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 21 % || 24.2 % || 4

Source: Eurostat

|| Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 33.5 % || 33.2 % || 16

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 43.8 % || 47 % || 23

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 12 % || 20 % (EU27) || 14

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 12.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 13

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Belgium || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.4 || 2.89 || 6

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.8 || 0.45 || 3

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 8

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.020 || 0.02 || 8

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Belgium || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Belgium || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 24.1 % || 18 || 39.6 % || 87.9 % || 9 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 55.2 % || 8 || 45.0 % || 11.4 % || 19 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 20.7 % || 9 || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || 20 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Bulgaria - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 101.1 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 25

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 13.8 || EUR 178.6 || 28

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 26

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % || || 12

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Bulgaria ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 14794 || 2545544 || 21

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 4.4 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 27

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 3.8 % || 24.2 % || 17

Source: Eurostat

|| Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 49.1 % || 33.2 % || 3

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 51.7 % || 47 % || 7

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || 3

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 14.4 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 9

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Bulgaria || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.2 || 2.89 || 21

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 7

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 20

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 21

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Bulgaria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Bulgaria || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 39.0 % || 13 || 39.6 % || 59.6 % || 17 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 51.2 % || 10 || 45.0 % || 37.7 % || 11 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 9.8 % || 22 || 15.4 % || 2.8 % || 9 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Croatia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 318.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 18

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 74.5 || EUR 178.6 || 19

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 10

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.6 % || 1.4 % || 7

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 1.5 % || || 18

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Croatia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 11454 || 2545544 || 23

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 6.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 23

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.4 % || 24.2 % || 19

Source: Eurostat

|| Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 47.3 % || 33.2 % || 4

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 54.6 % || 47 % || 5

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || 3

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 15.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 8

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Croatia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.7 || 2.89 || 4

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 15

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 16

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.004 || 0.02 || 17

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Croatia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Croatia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 53.5 % || 3 || 39.6 % || 32.1 % || 25 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 34.9 % || 25 || 45.0 % || 66.5 % || 4 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 11.6 % || 19 || 15.4 % || 1.4 % || 14 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Cyprus - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 69.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 26

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 81.0 || EUR 178.6 || 18

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 20

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.9 % || 1.4 % || 21

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % || || 12

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Cyprus ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 1937 || 2545544 || 26

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 4.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 26

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.7 % || 24.2 % || 22

Source: Eurostat

|| Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.9 % || 33.2 % || 12

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.0 % || 47 % || 12

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 11 % || 20 % (EU27) || 15

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 12.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 12

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Cyprus || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.0 || 2.89 || 3

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.2 || 0.45 || 1

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 1

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.004 || 0.02 || 18

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Cyprus || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Cyprus || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 18.2 % || 23 || 39.6 % || 8.0 % || 27 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 45.5 % || 17 || 45.0 % || 90.2 % || 2 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 36.4 % || 2 || 15.4 % || 1.8 % || 12 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Czech Republic - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1039.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 14

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 99.0 || EUR 178.6 || 16

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 11

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 10

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.03 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 52.4 % || || 1

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 53 % || || 1

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 47.6 % || || 9

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 47 % || || 6

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.9 % || || 7

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Czech Republic ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 45902 || 2545544 || 14

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 8.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 19

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 4.1 % || 24.2 % || 16

Source: Eurostat

|| Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 28.2 % || 33.2 % || 22

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 41.4 % || 47 % || 25

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 13 % || 20 % (EU27) || 13

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 16.9 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 6

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Czech Republic || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 12

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 13

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 18

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.003 || 0.02 || 19

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Czech Republic || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Czech Republic || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 34.8 % || 16 || 39.6 % || 46.9 % || 21 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.1 % || 20 || 45.0 % || 43.8 % || 6 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 26.1 % || 7 || 15.4 % || 9.3 % || 3 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Denmark - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2517.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 8

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 451.1 || EUR 178.6 || 2

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 1.0 % || 0.7 % || 2

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.7 % || 1.4 % || 5

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.12 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.2 % || || 16

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Denmark ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 56771 || 2545544 || 13

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 19.4 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 2

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 17.8 % || 24.2 % || 9

Source: Eurostat

|| Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 33.1 % || 33.2 % || 17

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 45.3 % || 47 % || 20

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 15 % || 20 % (EU27) || 11

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 14.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 10

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Denmark || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.6 || 2.89 || 14

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 11

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 10

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.020 || 0.02 || 9

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Denmark || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Denmark || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 16.0 % || 25 || 39.6 % || 71.4 % || 15 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 56.0 % || 7 || 45.0 % || 28.2 % || 12 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 28.0 % || 4 || 15.4 % || 0.3 % || 23 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Estonia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 145.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 23

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 109.3 || EUR 178.6 || 15

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 6

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.1 % || 1.4 % || 1

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.1 % || || 17

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Estonia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 7646 || 2545544 || 24

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 13

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 4.1 % || 24.2 % || 16

Source: Eurostat

|| Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 43.7 % || 33.2 % || 7

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.5 % || 47 % || 10

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 21.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 5

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Estonia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.8 || 2.89 || 22

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 14

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 22

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.006 || 0.02 || 15

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Estonia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Estonia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 20.0 % || 22 || 39.6 % || 88.1 % || 8 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 66.7 % || 2 || 45.0 % || 10.0 % || 21 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 13.3 % || 16 || 15.4 % || 1.9 % || 11 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Finland - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 2064.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 11

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 382.2 || EUR 178.6 || 3

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 1.1 % || 0.7 % || 1

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.9 % || 1.4 % || 4

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.6 % || || 9

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Finland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 57549 || 2545544 || 12

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 21.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 1

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 6.8 % || 24.2 % || 14

Source: Eurostat

|| Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 32.1 % || 33.2 % || 19

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.9 % || 47 % || 8

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 24 % || 20 % (EU27) || 4

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 25.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 2

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Finland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.4 || 2.89 || 17

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 17

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 12

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.027 || 0.02 || 4

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Finland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Finland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 44.4 % || 7 || 39.6 % || 77.3 % || 14 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 38.9 % || 22 || 45.0 % || 21.5 % || 14 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 16.7 % || 12 || 15.4 % || 1.2 % || 15 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

France - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 15134.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 2

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 231.7 || EUR 178.6 || 8

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 9

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.3 % || 1.4 % || 12

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. || || 0

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || France ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 338761 || 2545544 || 3

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.9 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 11

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 35.4 % || 24.2 % || 1

Source: Eurostat

|| France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 25.6 % || 33.2 % || 25

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 47 % || 0

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 19 % || 20 % (EU27) || 9

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 6.5 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 19

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || France || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 13

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 20

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 7

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.021 || 0.02 || 6

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || France || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || France || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 40.9 % || 10 || 39.6 % || 91.0 % || 5 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 48.5 % || 13 || 45.0 % || 8.1 % || 24 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 10.6 % || 20 || 15.4 % || 1.0 % || 19 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Germany - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 24034.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 1

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 293.7 || EUR 178.6 || 6

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 4

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.0 % || 1.4 % || 2

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 36 % || || 3

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 37.3 % || || 2

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 64.7 % || || 7

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 63.7 % || || 4

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.3 % || || 6

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Germany ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 520561 || 2545544 || 1

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 12.3 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 9

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 11.2 % || 24.2 % || 11

Source: Eurostat

|| Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 26.7 % || 33.2 % || 24

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 45.4 % || 47 % || 19

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 15 % || 20 % (EU27) || 11

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 11.7 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 15

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Germany || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.4 || 2.89 || 18

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 24

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 9

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.036 || 0.02 || 1

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Germany || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Germany || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 65.9 % || 1 || 39.6 % || 90.3 % || 6 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 26.8 % || 27 || 45.0 % || 8.6 % || 23 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 7.3 % || 23 || 15.4 % || 1.1 % || 17 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Greece - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 731.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 16

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 65.8 || EUR 178.6 || 20

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 21

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 31.4 % || || 4

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 37.3 % || || 3

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 68.6 % || || 6

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 62.7 % || || 5

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 6.2 % || || 2

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Greece ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 45239 || 2545544 || 15

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 18

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || n.a. % || 24.2 % || 0

Source: Eurostat

|| Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.7 % || 33.2 % || 13

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 43.9 % || 47 % || 22

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Greece || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 10

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 10

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 14

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 22

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Greece || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Greece || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 30.0 % || 17 || 39.6 % || 46.7 % || 22 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 60.0 % || 4 || 45.0 % || 53.2 % || 5 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 10.0 % || 21 || 15.4 % || 0.2 % || 25 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Hungary - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 337.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 17

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 34.0 || EUR 178.6 || 25

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 24

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 23

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.1 % || || 11

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Hungary ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36945 || 2545544 || 16

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 8.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 20

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.7 % || 24.2 % || 18

Source: Eurostat

|| Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 31.7 % || 33.2 % || 20

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 46.5 % || 47 % || 17

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 21 % || 20 % (EU27) || 7

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 8.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 17

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Hungary || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.2 || 2.89 || 20

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 16

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 17

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.007 || 0.02 || 14

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Hungary || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Hungary || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 22.7 % || 19 || 39.6 % || 54.0 % || 20 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 59.1 % || 6 || 45.0 % || 40.3 % || 8 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 18.2 % || 11 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 4 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Ireland - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 760.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 15

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 165.9 || EUR 178.6 || 11

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.5 % || 0.7 % || 18

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 19

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 37.3 % || || 2

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 62.7 % || || 8

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.4 % || || 14

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Ireland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 22131 || 2545544 || 19

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 10.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 14

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.5 % || 24.2 % || 6

Source: Eurostat

|| Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 32.4 % || 33.2 % || 18

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 49.2 % || 47 % || 14

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Ireland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.5 || 2.89 || 5

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.8 || 0.45 || 4

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 6

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.016 || 0.02 || 10

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Ireland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Ireland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 42.9 % || 8 || 39.6 % || 92.5 % || 3 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 42.9 % || 18 || 45.0 % || 6.4 % || 26 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.3 % || 14 || 15.4 % || 1.2 % || 16 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Italy - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 8822.3 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 4

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 145.1 || EUR 178.6 || 13

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 16

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 17

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. || || 0

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Italy ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 151597 || 2545544 || 5

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 6.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 24

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 8.4 % || 24.2 % || 13

Source: Eurostat

|| Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 34.9 % || 33.2 % || 15

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 53.2 % || 47 % || 6

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 23.4 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 3

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Italy || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.5 || 2.89 || 2

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 5

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 5

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.021 || 0.02 || 7

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Italy || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Italy || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 46.2 % || 6 || 39.6 % || 84.9 % || 13 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.7 % || 19 || 45.0 % || 14.5 % || 15 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.1 % || 15 || 15.4 % || 0.6 % || 22 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Latvia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 32.8 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 27

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 16.1 || EUR 178.6 || 26

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.1 % || 0.7 % || 28

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.4 % || 1.4 % || 26

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 6.1 % || || 3

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Latvia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 7377 || 2545544 || 25

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 7.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 21

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 0.2 % || 24.2 % || 24

Source: Eurostat

|| Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 53.3 % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 59.9 % || 47 % || 1

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 32 % || 20 % (EU27) || 2

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 22.2 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 4

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Latvia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.9 || 2.89 || 27

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 26

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 25

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 24

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Latvia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Latvia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 21.4 % || 20 || 39.6 % || 56.6 % || 19 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 64.3 % || 3 || 45.0 % || 37.8 % || 10 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 14.3 % || 14 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 5 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Lithuania - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 119.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 24

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 39.8 || EUR 178.6 || 23

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 22

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.0 % || 1.4 % || 20

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.6 % || || 20

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Lithuania ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 17358 || 2545544 || 20

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 11.7 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 12

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 0 % || 24.2 % || 25

Source: Eurostat

|| Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 52.1 % || 33.2 % || 2

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 57.0 % || 47 % || 2

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 14 % || 20 % (EU27) || 12

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 11.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 14

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Lithuania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.1 || 2.89 || 25

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 27

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 26

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 27

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Lithuania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Lithuania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 53.8 % || 2 || 39.6 % || 87.0 % || 11 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 46.2 % || 16 || 45.0 % || 13.0 % || 17 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || 0 || 15.4 % || n.a. % || 0 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Luxembourg - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 282.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 21

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 538.3 || EUR 178.6 || 1

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.7 % || 0.7 % || 13

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 11

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 6.5 % || || 9

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 5.8 % || || 6

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 93.5 % || || 1

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 94.2 % || || 1

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.9 % || || 19

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Luxembourg ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 3267 || 2545544 || 28

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 6

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.3 % || 24.2 % || 7

Source: Eurostat

|| Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24 % || 33.2 % || 27

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.9 % || 47 % || 9

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 9 % || 20 % (EU27) || 16

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 0.0 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 20

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Luxembourg || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 2.89 || 0

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 0.45 || 0

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || n.a. || 0.45 || 0

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || n.a. || 0.02 || 0

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Luxembourg || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Luxembourg || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || 5 || 39.6 % || 94.8 % || 2 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 50.0 % || 12 || 45.0 % || 5.2 % || 27 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || 0 || 15.4 % || n.a. % || 0 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Malta - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 20.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 28

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 48.9 || EUR 178.6 || 22

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.3 % || 0.7 % || 25

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.7 % || 1.4 % || 24

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 0.4 % || || 21

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Malta ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 1273 || 2545544 || 27

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 7.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 22

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.4 % || 24.2 % || 23

Source: Eurostat

|| Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 26.9 % || 33.2 % || 23

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 47 % || 0

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Malta || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.4 || 2.89 || 24

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 18

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 27

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.005 || 0.02 || 16

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Malta || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Malta || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || n.a. % || 0 || 39.6 % || n.a. % || 0 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 33.3 % || 26 || 45.0 % || 99.3 % || 1 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 66.7 % || 1 || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || 21 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Netherlands - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 4664.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 6

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 278.8 || EUR 178.6 || 7

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || 8

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.5 % || 1.4 % || 9

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.12 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 29.2 % || || 5

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 29.2 % || || 4

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 70.7 % || || 5

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 70.7 % || || 3

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.9 % || || 13

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Netherlands ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 82991 || 2545544 || 8

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 16

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 20.9 % || 24.2 % || 5

Source: Eurostat

|| Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24.1 % || 33.2 % || 26

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 44.9 % || 47 % || 21

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 13 % || 20 % (EU27) || 13

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 13.6 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 11

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Netherlands || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 4.7 || 2.89 || 1

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.9 || 0.45 || 2

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.7 || 0.45 || 2

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.030 || 0.02 || 3

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Netherlands || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Netherlands || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || 5 || 39.6 % || 88.2 % || 7 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 46.9 % || 15 || 45.0 % || 11.7 % || 18 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 3.1 % || 25 || 15.4 % || 0.1 % || 26 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Poland - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1370.1 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 13

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 35.6 || EUR 178.6 || 24

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 23

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.9 % || 1.4 % || 22

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.00 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3 % || || 12

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Poland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 100723 || 2545544 || 6

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 5.8 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 25

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.9 % || 24.2 % || 21

Source: Eurostat

|| Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 38.6 % || 33.2 % || 10

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 53.2 % || 47 % || 6

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || 0

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Poland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.6 || 2.89 || 15

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 23

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 19

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.003 || 0.02 || 20

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Poland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Poland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 35.2 % || 15 || 39.6 % || 69.9 % || 16 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 59.3 % || 5 || 45.0 % || 27.7 % || 13 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 5.6 % || 24 || 15.4 % || 2.4 % || 10 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Portugal - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 1555.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 12

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 147.5 || EUR 178.6 || 12

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 3

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 2.0 % || 1.4 % || 3

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 23.5 % || || 7

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || 22 % || || 5

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 76.5 % || || 3

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || 78 % || || 2

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.2 % || || 16

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Portugal ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 100435 || 2545544 || 7

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 18.1 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 3

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 12 % || 24.2 % || 10

Source: Eurostat

|| Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 46.4 % || 33.2 % || 5

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 56.3 % || 47 % || 3

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 22 % || 20 % (EU27) || 6

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 7.3 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 18

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Portugal || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.0 || 2.89 || 26

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 25

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 23

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 26

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Portugal || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Portugal || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 40.7 % || 11 || 39.6 % || 87.9 % || 10 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 39.0 % || 21 || 45.0 % || 8.7 % || 22 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 20.3 % || 10 || 15.4 % || 3.5 % || 8 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Romania - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 290.5 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 20

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 14.5 || EUR 178.6 || 27

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.2 % || 0.7 % || 27

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 0.6 % || 1.4 % || 25

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || n.a. || || 0

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Romania ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 25489 || 2545544 || 17

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 2.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 28

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 2.1 % || 24.2 % || 20

Source: Eurostat

|| Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 46.1 % || 33.2 % || 6

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 55.3 % || 47 % || 4

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 36 % || 20 % (EU27) || 1

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 8.8 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 17

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Romania || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.7 || 2.89 || 11

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 9

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.2 || 0.45 || 21

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.001 || 0.02 || 25

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Romania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Romania || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 35.6 % || 14 || 39.6 % || 43.7 % || 23 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 37.8 % || 23 || 45.0 % || 14.5 % || 16 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 26.7 % || 6 || 15.4 % || 41.8 % || 1 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Slovakia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 294.7 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 19

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 54.5 || EUR 178.6 || 21

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.4 % || 0.7 % || 19

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 18

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.4 % || || 10

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Slovakia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 24711 || 2545544 || 18

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.2 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 17

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 1.4 % || 24.2 % || 23

Source: Eurostat

|| Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 42.6 % || 33.2 % || 8

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.7 % || 47 % || 14

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 23 % || 20 % (EU27) || 5

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 9.1 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 16

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Slovakia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 1.7 || 2.89 || 23

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 19

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.1 || 0.45 || 24

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.002 || 0.02 || 23

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Slovakia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Slovakia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 16.7 % || 24 || 39.6 % || 40.6 % || 24 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 54.2 % || 9 || 45.0 % || 41.2 % || 7 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 29.2 % || 3 || 15.4 % || 18.2 % || 2 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Slovenia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 190.0 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 22

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 92.4 || EUR 178.6 || 17

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.5 % || 0.7 % || 17

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.1 % || 1.4 % || 16

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.14 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || 21.3 % || || 8

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || 78.7 % || || 2

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 2.3 % || || 15

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Slovenia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 12514 || 2545544 || 22

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 12.3 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 10

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 6.4 % || 24.2 % || 15

Source: Eurostat

|| Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 36.4 % || 33.2 % || 14

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 50.4 % || 47 % || 11

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Slovenia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 9

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.5 || 0.45 || 12

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 11

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.011 || 0.02 || 12

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Slovenia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Slovenia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 15.8 % || 26 || 39.6 % || 13.9 % || 26 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 68.4 % || 1 || 45.0 % || 80.5 % || 3 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 15.8 % || 13 || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || 6 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Spain - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 6185.2 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 5

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 132.1 || EUR 178.6 || 14

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 14

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.3 % || 1.4 % || 13

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 3.8 % || || 8

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Spain ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 220254 || 2545544 || 4

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 9.5 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 15

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 18 % || 24.2 % || 8

Source: Eurostat

|| Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 38.7 % || 33.2 % || 9

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.6 % || 47 % || 15

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Spain || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 2.5 || 2.89 || 16

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 22

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.3 || 0.45 || 13

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.009 || 0.02 || 13

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Spain || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Spain || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 39.5 % || 12 || 39.6 % || 59.2 % || 18 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 48.4 % || 14 || 45.0 % || 39.0 % || 9 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 12.1 % || 18 || 15.4 % || 1.8 % || 13 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Sweden - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 3581.6 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 7

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 377.7 || EUR 178.6 || 4

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.9 % || 0.7 % || 5

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.7 % || 1.4 % || 6

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.3 % || || 6

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Sweden ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 80039 || 2545544 || 9

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 16.0 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 4

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 22 % || 24.2 % || 3

Source: Eurostat

|| Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 37.2 % || 33.2 % || 0

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 48.4 % || 47 % || 16

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 20 % || 20 % (EU27) || 8

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || 26.9 % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 1

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Sweden || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.3 || 2.89 || 7

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 6

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 3

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.036 || 0.02 || 2

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || Sweden || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Sweden || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 41.7 % || 9 || 39.6 % || 95.8 % || 1 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 33.3 % || 26 || 45.0 % || 4.0 % || 28 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 25.0 % || 8 || 15.4 % || 0.2 % || 24 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

United Kingdom - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD, 2012 ||  EUR 11040.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || 3

GBAORD per capita, 2012 || EUR 173.9 || EUR 178.6 || 10

GBAORD/GDP, 2012 || 0.6 % || 0.7 % || 15

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures, 2012 || 1.2 % || 1.4 % || 15

Tax incentives, 2009 (share of GBAORD) || 0.07 || n.a. || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as project based, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2012 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated as institutional funding, 2013 || n.a. || || n.a.

Share of GBAORD allocated to transnational cooperation, 2012 || 4.9 % || || 4

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || United Kingdom ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 429009 || 2545544 || 2

Number of researchers/1000 active population, 2011 (headcount) || 13.6 ‰ || 10.6 ‰ || 7

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students, 2011 || 30.7 % || 24.2 % || 2

Source: Eurostat

|| United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of women researchers, 2011 (headcount) || 37.7 % || 33.2 % || 11

Share of women PhD graduates, 2012 (% based on headcount) || 46.1 % || 47 % || 18

Share of women senior researchers, 2010 or latest available data (% based on headcount) || 17 % || 20 % (EU27) || 10

Proportion of women heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector, 2010 (% based on headcount) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU28) || 0

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || United Kingdom || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher, 2000-2011 || 3.0 || 2.89 || 8

Co-publications within the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.4 || 0.45 || 21

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU by researcher, 2000-2011 || 0.6 || 0.45 || 4

PCT patent applications by researcher, 2010 || 0.013 || 0.02 || 11

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

2013 || United Kingdom || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || United Kingdom || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 51.3 % || 4 || 39.6 % || 91.8 % || 4 || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 35.9 % || 24 || 45.0 % || 7.1 % || 25 || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 12.8 % || 17 || 15.4 % || 1.0 % || 18 || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Iceland - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR 111.4 m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR 348.6 || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || 1.1 % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || 2.2 % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Iceland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || 3350 || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 18.8 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 23.4 % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || 37.5 % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 52.5 % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 24 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 33.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Iceland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || 2.4 || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.6 || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.5 || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || 0.008 || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Iceland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Iceland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 73.1 % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 50.0 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.9 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || n.a. || 15.4 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 201

Montenegro - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Montenegro ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) ||  % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || n.a. % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 0.0 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Montenegro || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Montenegro || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Montenegro || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || n.a. % || n.a. || 39.6 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 100.0 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 100.0 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || n.a. % || n.a. || 15.4 % || n.a. % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Norway - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR 3099.9 m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR 621.7 || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || 0.8 % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || 1.8 % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Norway ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || 45578 || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 17.4 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 33 % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || 36.2 % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 48.1 % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 21 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 25.0 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Norway || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || 2.5 || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.5 || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || 0.4 || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || 0.016 || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Norway || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Norway || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 50.0 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 86.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 41.2 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 12.5 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 8.8 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 0.7 % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Serbia - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Serbia ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 7.1 % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || n.a. % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || n.a. % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || n.a. % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Serbia || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Serbia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Serbia || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 28.9 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 71.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 63.2 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.7 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 7.9 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 1.6 % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Switzerland - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Switzerland ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || n.a. ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 49.3 % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || n.a. % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 43.2 % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 26 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 8.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Switzerland || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Switzerland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Switzerland || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 52.2 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 89.7 % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 30.4 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 4.7 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 17.4 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 5.6 % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014

Turkey - Snapshot

Public funding for Research || Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

GBAORD  in 2012 ||  EUR n.a. m || EUR 90670.3 m || n.a.

GBAORD per capita in 2012 || EUR n.a. || EUR 179.2 || n.a.

GBAORD/GDP in 2012 || n.a. % || 0.7 % || n.a.

GBAORD as share of total government expenditures || n.a. % || 1.4 % || n.a.

Tax incentives (share of GBAORD) || n.a. || n.a. || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and OECD

Researchers || Turkey ||      EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Number of researchers in 2011 || n.a. || 2435487 || n.a.

Number of researchers/1000 active population (2011) || 5.2 ‰ || 10.5 ‰ ||

Non-EU doctorate students as a % of all doctorate students (2011) || 3.2 % || 24.2 % ||

Source: Eurostat

|| Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Share of female researchers (2011) || 35.6 % || 33.2 % || 1

Share of female PhD graduates (2012) || 46.5 % || 47 % ||

Share of female senior researchers (2010 or latest available data) || 28 % || 20 % (EU27) || n.a.

Proportion of female heads of institutions in the Higher Education Sector (2010) || 4.3 % || 15.5 % (EU27) || n.a.

Source: Eurostat and She figures (2013)

Outputs || Turkey || EU || Ranking among EU Member States

Publications by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 2.89 || n.a.

Co-publications within the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

Co-publications with researchers from outside the EU, by researcher (2000-2011) || n.a. || 0.45 || n.a.

PCT patent applications by researcher (2010) || n.a. || 0.02 || n.a.

Source: DG RTD, Economic Analysis Unit

|| Turkey || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU || Turkey || Ranking of the cluster among EU Member States || EU

|| Share of institutions || Share of institutions (weighted)

Cluster ERA compliant || 23.5 % || n.a. || 39.6 % || 36.9 % || n.a. || 81.2 %

Cluster Limited ERA compliance || 52.9 % || n.a. || 45.0 % || 26.0 % || n.a. || 16.8 %

Cluster ERA not applicable || 23.5 % || n.a. || 15.4 % || 37.1 % || n.a. || 2.0 %

Source: DG RTD, ERA policy reforms unit, ERA survey 2014