HOME   NEWS & EVENTS   FP7   LIFE+   PARTNER SEARCH   DOWNLOADS   LINKS   CONTACTS  
 
 

 

News

The latest eBulletin is now available to download - January 2012


31st January - New FP7 Service for Rule Interpretation Issues
The Research Clearing Committee (RCC) was set up to ensure the uniform interpretation of research rules among different Commission services. RCC may be consulted on any legal, financial or management matter for which there is no common position among the European Commission's services and it is empowered to take final decisions on matters related to the implementation of the whole project cycle, as well as on all management matters related to FP projects. If you have any issue or would like to consult their frequently asked questions section, please click here.

 

13th December - LIFE+ Beyond 2013
Evaluations on the LIFE Programme have concluded that while LIFE remained a crucial, successful and effective financial instrument for achieving EU environmental policy objectives, it required some modifications in order to fulfill its EU added-value potential. The Commission, therefore, launched a discussion process on the future of LIFE+ from 2014 onwards; with a view to designing a future EU financial instrument (a continuation of LIFE+) that would best address the needs of the environment and climate protection. The discussion and consultation has resulted in the Commission proposing to allocate €3.2 billion over 2014-2020 to a new 'LIFE Programme for the Environment and Climate Action'. The proposed new LIFE Regulation, published on the 12th December, will build on the success of the existing LIFE+ Programme but will be better structured, more strategic, simplified and more flexible, including being able to work outside the EU territory.

New aspects of the future LIFE Programme include:

  • Creation of a new sub-programme for Climate Action
  • Clearer definition of priorities with multi-annual work programmes adopted in consultation with the Member States
  • New possibilities to implement programmes on a larger scale through 'Integrated projects' which can help mobilise other EU, national and private funds for environmental or climate objectives.

The sub-programme for Environment will support efforts in the following areas:

  • Environment and Resource Efficiency will focus on more innovative solutions for better implementation of environment policy and integrating environmental objectives in other sectors
  • Biodiversity will develop best practices to halt biodiversity loss and restore ecosystem services, while keeping its primary focus on supporting Natura 2000 sites, especially via integrated projects consistent with Member States Prioritised Action Frameworks (as described in the Commission's new paper on Financing Natura 2000)
  • Environmental Governance and Information will promote knowledge sharing, dissemination of best practices, and better compliance, in addition to awareness raising campaigns.

The sub-programme for Climate Action covers the following areas:

  • Climate Change Mitigation will focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions
  • Climate Change Adaptation will focus on increasing resilience to climate change
  • Climate Governance and Information will focus on increasing awareness, communication, cooperation and dissemination on climate mitigation and adaptation actions.

Grants to finance projects will remain the Programme's main type of intervention with operating grants for NGOs and other bodies still possible. There will also be scope for contributions to innovative financial instruments.

For more information about the consultation process and the new measures, please click here.

 

12th December 2011 - Horizon 2020: Commission Proposes €80 Billion Investment in Research & Innovation
The European Commission has presented an €80 billion package of proposals for research and innovation funding, as part of the drive to create sustainable growth and new jobs in Europe. The new programme, Horizon 2020 will make it easier for applicants to seek funding and is designed to help bring more good ideas to market. Horizon 2020 will run from 2014 to 2020. The proposals will be negotiated by the European Parliament and the European Council over the next two years with a view to adoption of legislative acts by end 2013. Alongside this, Parliament and Council negotiations will determine the EU budget for 2014-20, including the overall budget for Horizon 2020.

Horizon 2020 - proposed new programme architecture

EU funding for research and innovation will be focused on three strategic objectives, implemented through specific programmes and a dedicated financial contribution to the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT).

The first objective is dedicated to supporting an 'Excellent science' in Europe. A budget of €24.6 billion will strengthen the EU's position as a world leader in science. This will include:

  • €13.2 billion for the highly successful European Research Council (ERC), which provides substantial grants to top-level individual researchers working in Europe.
  • Investment of €3.1 billion in future and emerging technologies (FET) to open up new fields of research and innovation.
  • A budget of €5.75 billion for the Marie Curie Actions to develop research and innovation skills through the training, mobility and career development of researchers.
  • Funding of €2.4 billion will also be available for supporting access to, and networking of priority research infrastructures (including e-infrastructures) across Europe.

The second objective, 'Industrial leadership', with a budget of €17.9 billion, will help make Europe a more attractive location to invest in research and innovation. It will include major investments in key industrial technologies such as Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), nanotechnologies, biotechnology and space (total of €13.7 billion). It will facilitate access to risk finance, which has a high leverage on private investment and has been shown to be a very valuable tool in fighting the lack of risk capital following the financial crisis (dedicated budget of €3.5 billion). It will also provide EU-wide support for innovation in SMEs with high growth potential (€0.6 billion).

The third objective, 'Societal challenges' will see €31.7 billion allocated to tackling the major issues affecting the lives of European citizens. The focus will be on six key areas:

  • Health, demographic change and well-being (€8 billion);
  • Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research and the bio-based economy (€4.1 billion);
  • Secure, clean and efficient energy (€5.7 billion);
  • Smart, green and integrated transport (€6.8 billion);
  • Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials (€3.1 billion);
  • Inclusive, innovative and secure societies (€3.8 billion).

The goal will be more than ever to bring excellent research results to market. This will deliver direct benefits to citizens, such as affordable health-care, protection against cyber-crime, and the transition to a resource-efficient, low-carbon economy.

The Commission has launched a new website for Horizon 2020. Further information, including the published proposals can be found here.

 

1st August 2011 - New LIFE Nature Publication
Most LIFE Nature projects focus on conservation action in-situ, within the natural habitat of a particular threatened species. However, this may not be enough to help the most vulnerable species, in which case 'ex-situ' conservation measures are required to address the threat of extinction.

The LIFE programme has a distinguished track record of funding crucial ex-situ interventions, targeting a wide range of vulnerable species, ranging from flagship species such as the brown bear and golden eagle, to lesser-known but equally important fish, invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians and plants. LIFE funded actions to support habitats ex-situ have contributed to enhancing biodiversity, supporting the EU's policy goals.

The Commission is evaluating the contribution that ex-situ conservation has to make to the conservation of European species. This new publication highlights more than 80 LIFE Nature projects that feature ex-situ conservation actions, with the goal not only of highlighting innovative ideas and good practice, but also of pointing out some of the problems that previous LIFE projects have faced so that they might be avoided by current and future projects working in the challenging field of ex-situ conservation.

If you would like to download this publication, please click here.

 

Events

How to Fail at FP7 Seminar - 6th October

Phil Ward, Research Funding Manager at the University of Kent attended Beta's 'How to Fail at FP7 seminar'. Melvyn Askew was the speaker, an extremely experienced FP7 coordinator and evaluator and Phil has used his blog, Research Fundamentals, to pass on what he learnt. Phil has kindly allowed us to reproduce his blog which provides some useful tips and guidance for FP7 proposals.


The workshop title was like a thrown gauntlet: 'How to Fail at FP7.' Anyone can succeed at FP7, said the workshop leader, Melvyn Askew; it takes real determination to fail. He was being facetious, but there was an undercurrent of truth. After all, the EC tells you exactly what it wants, and how: it published voluminous guidance which, if followed, should lead to success. It's when you disregard this that you come unstuck, when you assume your project can be shoehorned in to the call, or that all costs are eligible, or that you can invite all your chums along to do separate projects under a vague umbrella.

So if it's that easy, why do so many people fail? Askew suggested it was down to time. You need time to not only draft the application but, way before you set pen to paper, time to lay the foundations. So here's a quick run down of what you should be doing, now, to prepare.

  • Think. Askew singled out one of the hapless workshop participants and asked, 'what's your strategy for getting European funding?' Like an embarrassed schoolboy the participant mumbled and looked at his shoes. As would the rest of us if he'd picked on us. The truth is most universities have a laissez faire attitude to applying. Askew, however, suggested that we should all be thinking strategically: what are our strengths? What are our weaknesses? What are our connections? Where should our focus be?
    Identify those strengths, those networks, and build on them. Don't leave it to chance, or to those on the periphery of European research, to play the tune.

  • Talk. Once you've established a European strategy, you need to lay the foundations for your consortium. Who are the best people working in your area? Who should you approach to be part of a consortium? Not everyone need be an equal partner, but equally there should be no 'make weights' or padding. Each partner should have a clear purpose. Once identified you need to sound them out and set ground rules about the collaboration. If you're coordinating, you will be the one held responsible, and you don't want to be left to pick up the bill should a partner renege on a collaboration agreement.

    You also need to talk to the Commission. Get a sense of what's on the horizon. Now is the time to start establishing contacts with Commission officials and project officers. They are there to help. Later, as the bid develops, they can clarify the intentions of the call, so that you don't end up pushing your project down a false trail. Your relationship should continue once your project's off the ground and you need to provide progress reports. Don't be scared of picking up the phone to the commission (or, in fact, to the NCPs) to get an insight into their thinking. Better still, spend the money on a Eurostar ticket to Brussels for an informal talk.

  • Plan. So you've identified your strengths and you have in place your partners. Now is the time to think about the project itself. One person - preferably with English as their native language - needs to pull it together and draft the application. It must appear to be coherent and unified, not like some kind of clippings album, with pieces taken from a selection of different newspapers. Each work package should interlink and interweave with the others; it should be interdependent and integral with the whole. It should be written in plain English, with acronyms spelt out and explained where necessary, and any jargon or slang cut out. Spell out everything, and don't assume anything. Just because you think you've got a global reputation, or your university is the toast of the UK, that doesn't mean that a Latvian evaluator will have heard of you or your institution.

  • Write. As you draft your application, you should keep in mind the assessment criteria that the EC will use. There are three elements, each of which gets a score out of five:

    - Science and Technology
    - Management
    - Impact

    The first of these is usually well met by applicants, albeit with a little too much context. The second is often so-so, and the third is frequently dire. Recent signals from the Commission are that they are tiring of poor impact programmes, so think seriously about how you will disseminate the findings of your research, and how you will engage with stakeholders. As with Research Council applications, it is a good idea to have an 'advisory group' that includes end users who can guide you in your research, and ensure that you are meeting the needs of those who may benefit from the research.

    The evaluation itself is, in the eyes of Askew, fair, balanced and objective. There is no truth in the belief that lobbying has any effect, or that the EC expects consortia to be balanced and equal, with members from north and south Europe, or from new and old member states. The consortium has to 'make sense' (see above), and that's it. In the peer review meeting there is a member of the Commission on hand to ensure fair play, and to object if they sense that the rapporteur is not heeding the views of all panellists, or being too partisan. As well as the evaluation criteria, you should bear in mind that, if your application is successful, you will have to go through a gruelling negotiation. At this stage the Commission will meet with you to discuss the nitty gritty of your project. They might present you with questions and queries that were raised by evaluators, such as unnecessary costs, or an unbalanced consortium. They may ask you to strip these out, and this may well affect your overall project. So preempt this by checking both the eligibility and the necessity of all components of your project.

  • Submit. Submit early, and often. Each time you submit via the EPSS system it overwrites what has already been submitted. Don't leave it until the last moment, only to find the software crashes, leaving you out in the cold.

Think. Talk. Plan. Write. Submit. Sounds so easy, doesn't it? Of course it isn't, and you'll face plenty of frustrations, barriers, hurdles and dead ends along the way. But if you give yourself time then you have a much better chance of succeeding - and not failing - at FP7.

Phil Ward, 6th October 2011