2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2013-rtd-005-eurostars2-en 1/9

ROADMAP

TITLE OF THE INITIATIVE Eurostars 2

LEAD DG – RESPONSIBLE UNIT DG RTD - C4 DATE OF ROADMAP 11/12/2012

This indicative roadmap is provided for information purposes only and is subject to change. It does not prejudge thefinal decision of the Commission on whether this initiative will be pursued or on its final content and structure.

A. Context and problem definition

(1) What is the political context of the initiative?

This roadmap describes the preparation of a decision under the ordinary legislative procedure (ex "co-

decision") by the European Parliament and Council under Art. 185 TFEU for a follow-up to the Eurostars Joint

Programme. Eurostars is a research and innovation programme that finances R&D performing SMEs building

on the EUREKA programme and is implemented by the EUREKA Secretariat.

EUREKA is an intergovernmental initiative based on a network launched in 1985 to support market-oriented

R&D and innovation projects by industry, research centres and universities across all technological sectors.

EUREKA now consists of 40 member countries (with the EU as its 41st member). The original budget for

Eurostars for 2008-2013 was EUR 400 million; EUR 300 million provided by the 33 Eurostars Member States

and participating countries and EUR 100 million from FP7. Eurostars 2 would build on Eurostars and will be

reoriented along the lines stated in its interim evaluation.

The EUREKA countries endorsed on 22 June 2012 in Budapest - at the occasion of the EUREKA Ministerial

conference - a strategy document on Eurostars 2 ("Budapest document"). The Budapest document gives a clear

sign of their willingness to continue with the programme.

(2) How does it relate to past and possible future initiatives, and to other EU policies?

Two specific aspects of H2020 action are in particular relevant: the support to innovative SMEs and thestrengthening of public-public partnerships with the aim to ensure the greatest possible impact of Union

funding. Under the "Industrial leadership" part, in its third chapter on "Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized

Enterprises", the Commission has therefore proposed an integrated approach to SMEs which also includes the

support to R&D performing SMEs through the continuation of a public-public partnership by way of art 185,

namely the Eurostars 2 initiative.

In the new Horizon 2020 setting, Eurostars 2 is part of an "ecosystem" together with the other initiatives

proposed under the same chapter, such as the new SME instrument. They would both address the same

objective, i.e. supporting SMEs in close-to-market research and innovation activities, but from different

perspectives:

- via the EU classical mechanisms in the case of the SME instrument, which funds projects with a clear EU

added value, and

- via the national programmes in the case of Eurostars, creating synergies thanks to the alignment and

synchronisation of national programmes supporting research and innovation in RTD intensive SMEs.

The co-existence of these initiatives leads to maximizing the outreach to both start-ups / university spin-offs

and already established companies, leading to the necessary critical mass of SMEs investing in research and

innovation to enhance competitiveness, growth and jobs and to the greatest possible impact of Union funding.

Eurostars 2 is also well articulated with actions foreseen in COSME, the programme for the Competitiveness of

enterprises and SMEs. COSME aims at encouraging the competitiveness of European enterprises, and in

particular of SMEs, current and potential entrepreneurs and business support organisations by providing better

access to finance, delivering business support services and promoting entrepreneurship. The SMEs' related

actions under H2020, including Eurostars 2, will focus on the support to research and innovation related

activities.

Public-public partnerships are acknowledged to contribute to the realisation of the European Research Area,

through their contribution in aligning and synchronising national programmes.

(3) What ex-post analysis of existing policy has been carried out? What results are relevant for this initiative?

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


2

Eurostars was established in 2008 by 32 EUREKA member countries (26 European Member States and 6

Associated countries to FP7). The European Union decided to join Eurostars by way of Art. 185 TFEU with a

financial support of a maximum of 100M€ for a period of 6 years, representing 25 % of the overall total public

contribution. Eurostars Joint Programme represented the first joint programme in the area of SMEs and was

specifically dedicated to research-performing SMEs. The programme will end in 2013.

In Decision No 743/2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008, an ex-post

evaluation of Eurostars is foreseen by the end of the programme. This ex-post evaluation is already foreseen in

the FP7 Research for the benefit of SMEs Work programme for 2013.

The Eurostars Decision also required an interim evaluation two years after the start of the programme. This

evaluation was carried out by a Group of Independent Experts in 2010, chaired by Mrs Laperrouze, former

Member of the European Parliament and Vice-President of the ITRE Committee. The report provided an

analysis of the main aspects of the Eurostars programme (operational and strategic) and recommendations on

both the short and longer term future. The experts’ report together with the Commission’s response was

published on 8 April 2011 at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations. The conclusions of this

assessment were very positive for its continuation within Horizon 2020, highlighting however some needed

improvements. The recommended improvements indicated in the Report from the Commission concerned i.a.

steps to further enhance scientific, management and financial integration of national programmes, ability of

R&D performing SMEs to access Eurostars and quality and efficiency of the implementation.

The Council in its conclusions on the Interim evaluation of the Eurostars Joint Programme adopted on 31 May

2011 "WELCOMES" the recommendation of the Group to continue Eurostars beyond 2013; and "WILLCONSIDER" its continuation in the overall context of the future Common Strategic Framework for Research and

Innovation funding.

(4) What are the main problems which this initiative will address?

a) Insufficient expenditure on R&D&I, in particular by SMEs

One of the key objectives of the EU during the last decade has been to encourage increasing levels of

investment in R&D. That 3% of the EU's GDP should be invested in R&D is one of the five headline targets of

Europe 2020. The EU-27’s R&D expenditure relative to GDP remains well below the corresponding shares

recorded in Japan and in the United States, mainly as a result of lower levels of private investment. Looking at

R&D funding by private companies according to their size, SMEs perform more R&D in the United States than in

the EU. In 2007, SMEs R&D expenditure amounted to 0.25% of GDP in the EU against 0.30% in the United

States. The gap between the United States and EU increases the further down the size classes one descends. Asa consequence, European SMEs do not grow sufficiently to become large R&D-investing and innovative

companies. The share of companies created in the United States after 1975 is three times higher among the

top R&D investing companies (54.4%) than among the top R&D investing EU companies (17.8%).

b) SMEs cannot find funding for their R&D activities

The financing of R&D projects conducted by SMEs is generally perceived as complex and risky by the majority

of commercial banks. Three reasons are often cited: Information asymmetries, market risk and lack of collateral

This “financing gap” is all the more important in a fast-changing knowledge-based economy because of the

speed of innovation. Innovative and R&D performing SMEs with high growth potential, many of them in high-

technology sectors, have played a pivotal role in raising productivity and maintaining competitiveness in recent

years. Public financing can play an important role in supporting the SME sector, particularly where there is

market failure or where incomplete markets inhibit the provision of adequate financing on terms suitable for

the SME’s stage of development. By participating to joint national programmes, the EU funding gives a leverage

effect on the Member States investments in innovation as well as on the private investments.

c) Ineffective fragmentation of Member States R&D programmes

Eurostars 2 will contribute to pooling scattered resources, to the alignment and to the synchronisation of

relevant national research and innovation programmes as well as to fostering open innovation and knowledge

circulation. By ensuring optimal interaction and strategic partnering between academia and industry, Eurostars

2 will also enhance exploitation of research results and knowledge transfer. These are important dimensions in

the European Research Area (ERA). The stronger these dimensions will be pursued in Eurostars 2, the greater

will be its contribution to ERA.

These are structural problems for Europe with no immediate quick and ready solutions and that need to be

tackled by a range of angles. Eurostars 1 has been recognised to have contributed to an improvement of the

situations, but the definite solution will only come via long term combined actions in different fields and with

different implementation modalities. Eurostars 2 with the appropriate improvements will give an even more

http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations



7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


3

important contribution to a fast reduction of the problems indicated.

(5) Who will be affected by it?

Under Eurostars Joint Programme, participating countries pool their national programmes and research

funding, resulting in a better and more efficient use of funds to support R&D performing SMEs to wider

exploit the results of their research.

The EU will generate an added value by enhancing and leveraging national programmes targeted to these

research intensive SMEs, taking into account the specific framework conditions in each member country. No

other action in H2020 is specifically dedicated to R&D performing SMEs.

Eurostars would provide attractive conditions and effective and efficient governance for doing research and

investing in R&D intensive sectors in Europe. It creates strong added value by fostering a healthy Europe-wide

scientific competition while ensuring the appropriate level of cooperation and coordination. It responds to

the needs and ambitions of citizens and effectively contributes to the sustainable development and

competitiveness of Europe.

The main activity in the Eurostars 2 Joint Programme consists of R&D activities driven by one or more R&D

performing SMEs established in the participating Eurostars Member States or the other participating

countries. Research organisations, universities, other SMEs, large companies and others may also participatein the Programme. The R&D activities can be carried out in the entire field of science and technology.

The main final beneficiaries of this programme will be the RTD intensive SMEs and other SMEs who will turn

the research into commercial products and the consumers who will benefit from new products to meet their

expectations and needs. Research organisations, universities, scientists, researchers and other companies will

also benefit from participating in the programme.

(6) Is EU action justified on grounds of subsidiarity? Why can Member States not achieve the objectives of the

proposed action sufficiently by themselves? Can the EU achieve the objectives better?

European involvement is adding a leverage effect to the national investment. Current data from Eureka on

Eurostars point to a substantial leverage effect, with EUR100M EU funds, leveraging EUR 400 M national

funds (EUR 100M more than initially foreseen by MS) and raising private co-financing to EUR 500 Ml.

In addition it is justified not only with the aim of reducing barriers for research intensive SMEs, but also of

promoting policy learning between participating Member States. EU research and innovation policies devoted

to research intensive SMEs in their innovation process should be supportive or supplement and coordinate

Member State policies based on the Europe 2020 strategy. EU coordination will address externalities of

Member States policies and could also support and supplement access to European-wide networks, which MS

policies will not do.

Eurostars offers the unique combination of a centralized management (for which a dedicated implementation

structure is already in place) with decentralized entry points. While Member States are the 'founders' of the

programme, the EU's role and contribution is key for the alignment and synchronisation of the relevant

national research and innovation programmes to continue and strengthen the joint programme structure,

featuring scientific, management and financial integration. This makes an important contribution towards the

realisation of the ERA and hence a more effective use of available resources.

It will contribute actively to European competitiveness, job creation, economic change and sustainable

development to achieve the Europe 2020 objectives. Eurostars 2 will support, through its bottom-up

approach, research and development carried out by trans-national consortia driven by R&D performing SMEs

and cooperating where appropriate with other relevant partners.

B. Objectives of the initiative

(1) What are the main policy objectives?

The general objective of Eurostars 2 is the following:

To stimulate economic growth and job creation by enhancing the competitiveness of R&D performing SMEs.

In order to achieve this general objective, several specific objectives have been set:

1. Three years after the end of each project, for each € 1 M of public (EU and participating countries)

funding the turnover of the participants should increase by at least € 10 M and at least 25 new jobs

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


4

should be created

2. Three years after the end of each project, at least three new or improved products, processes or

services should be on the market (per project)

3. By the end of the programme, the same funding rules for SMEs should be used by at least 75% of

Eurostars countries' national R&D programmes

In order to reach the specific objectives above, more detailed operational objectives have been identified,

partially based on the interim evaluation of Eurostars 1 (cf. COM (2011) 186, 8.4.2011). The most relevant

ones are:

• Ensure excellence/impact of the projects selected by fostering EU level and international competition

through the application of a single selection and evaluation process (Scientific integration of national

programmes)

• Increase SMEs access to the funding of the programme by reducing the time to contract to maximum

7 months, ensure at least 2 calls per year (Management integration of national programmes)

• Ensure (combined EU and MS) funding for the top 50 excellence based projects and for 50 to 75% of

the applications that have been ranked above the quality threshold (Financial integration of national

programmes)

• Achieve a leverage effect of the EU funding of at least 3 for other public funding (1€ EU funding to

generate at least 3 € funding from participating countries)* • Achieve a leverage effect of the EU funding of at least 5 for private funding (1€ EU funding to generate

at least 5€ funding from private sources)

Do the objectives imply developing EU policy in new areas?

No new EU policy is expected as direct outcome, but the initiative is expected to contribute the Horizon 2020

objectives and in particular to the realisation of the European Research Area (ERA).

C. Options

(1) What are the policy options (including exemptions/adapted regimes e.g. for SMEs) being considered?

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


5

a) Business-as-usual (BAU): maintaining the current Eurostars joint programme for R&D intensive SMEs as it

is today. In this scenario, the existing Eurostars joint programme would be simply carried forward into the

next multiannual financial framework as an art. 185 initiative in its current format.

b) The zero option: No EU decision to continue the EU participation and financial contribution to this

initiative after the end of its current funding phase (2013).

c) Reinforced partnership: A new and better Eurostars joint programme which includes improvements

based on the recommendations made in the mid-term evaluation report. The proposals in the mid-term

evaluation report concerned i.a.: (i) steps to further enhance scientific, management and financial integration

of national programmes, (ii) ability of R&D performing SMEs to access Eurostars, and, (iii) quality and

efficiency of the implementation. The reinforced partnership policy option means full implementation of all

the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation report (points (i) – (iii)), thus building on the lessons

learnt from Eurostars 1.

Sub-options reflecting different alternatives for improvement of the functioning of the programme exist:

1. Partial implementation 1: This sub-option includes the recommendations under point (i), steps to

further enhance scientific, management and financial integration, but not recommendations under

point (ii), ability of R&D performing SMEs to access Eurostars, and not recommendations under

point (iii), quality and efficiency of the implementation.2. Partial implementation 2: This sub-option includes recommendations under point (ii), ability of R&D

performing SMEs to access Eurostars, but not recommendations under point (i), steps to further

enhance scientific, management and financial integration and not recommendations under point

(iii), quality and efficiency of the implementation.

3. Partial implementation 3: This sub-option includes recommendations under point (iii), quality and

efficiency of the implementation, but not recommendations under point (i), steps to further

enhance scientific, management and financial integration, and not recommendations under point

(ii), ability of R&D performing SMEs to access Eurostars,

(2) What legislative or 'soft law' instruments could be considered?

The only legislative instrument considered is a Decision based on art. 185 TFEU.

(3) How do the options respect the proportionality principle?

The Eurostars 2 will be funded by the Eurostars Member States and the EU Commission. Each Eurostars

Member State budget shall reflect its potential funding weight with regard to a balanced funding and the

agreed targets for project funding. The EU financial contribution will have to be commensurate with the

commitments of the MSs.

D. Initial assessment of impacts

(1) What are the benefits and costs of each of the policy options?

a) Business As Usual (BAU): Costs would be at the same level as they are currently (= for Eurostars 1) for the

whole duration of the programme. However, the programme has developed from an initially planned 150proposals per call to currently about 400 per call. Without new specific measures in place to handle the

amount of applications, the consequences would be a lower success rate of proposals, longer time to

contract, less projects supported by the Eurostars programme, and also fewer national programmes

synchronising and harmonising their activities. This would ultimately lead to increased indirect costs due to

overlaps and other inefficiencies, and the programme would soon become unattractive for the final

beneficiaries and unable to have the desirable impact on integration.

b) The zero option: This option will entail no direct costs (expenses from H2020), but would result in

decreased leverage effects, less effective synergies between national policies and programmes, no dedicated

instrument for R&D intensive SMEs and, finally, less opportunities for R&D intensive SMEs to invest into

innovation and growth.

c) Reinforced partnership: The full reinforced partnership alternative includes all the three elements

mentioned above, i.e.: (i) increased integration, (ii) easier access for SMEs and (iii) increased efficiency in the

implementation. This option will give the highest effect in terms of the objectives mentioned above in part B

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


6

and more benefits compared to the sub-options with partial implementation of the recommendations from

the mid-term evaluation.

Sub-options:

1. Partial implementation 1 - addressing only (i): This sub-option will lead to increased integration, but

the beneficiaries (R&D performing SMEs) will probably experience little change compared to

Business As Usual. This is therefore not a viable option.

2. Partial implementation 2 - addressing only (ii): This sub-option might lead to that a higher numberof SMEs applying, but without improvements in terms of quality and efficiency of implementation

and slow procedures due to lack of integration, this is not a viable option.

3. Partial implementation 3 – addressing only (iii): This sub-option implies increased efficiency in the

implementation, but without further integration and easier access for the SMEs, there will be little

change in terms of impact of the programme. This is therefore also not a viable alternative.

Each of these sub-options is a sub-optional component to the option implementing the three main

recommendations.

(2) Could any or all of the options have significant impacts on (i) simplification, (ii) administrative burden and(iii) on relations with other countries, (iv) implementation arrangements? And (v) could any be difficult to

transpose for certain Member States?

(i) Eurostars will follow as much as possible the current Rules for Participation under Horizon 2020. Eurostars

2 will work further on scientific, administrative and financial integration of the participating national

programmes.

(ii) Administrative burden should decrease due to mutual learning and exchange of best practices in parallel

to synchronisation and harmonisation of national activities.

(iii) Eurostars will enhance the relation with other countries as it is requested a minimum of two different

countries in every Eurostars project.

(iv) Eurostars programme will be implemented through a Dedicated Implementation Structure (DIS). As it is

currently the case this shall be the Eureka secretariat, with long experience in similar programmes.

(v) Efforts will be made to further streamline the national funding rules, also as far as possible in line with the

H2020 Rules for Participation.

(3) Will an IA be carried out for this initiative and/or possible follow-up initiatives?

An ex-ante impact assessment for Eurostars 2 is compulsory. This assessment will be carried out by the

Commission services based also on inputs from the Eureka secretariat and the participating Member States.

(4) When will the IA work start?

Some evidence has been already gathered to support this ex-ante evaluation. The synthesis work will start in

September 2012.

(5) When will you set up the IA Steering Group and how often will it meet?

It has been set up in autumn 2012 and meetings should take place approximately once a month.

(6) What DGs will be invited?

SG, SJ, DG AGRI, DG BUDG, DG CLIMA, DG COMP, DG DEVCO, DG ENLARG, DG EMPL, DG ENER, DE ENTR, DG

INFSO, DG ENV, DG JUST, DG MARE, DG MARKT, DG REGIO, DG SANCO, DG TAXUD, DG TRADE, have been

invited to participate in the group.

(7) Is any option likely to have impacts on the EU budget above € 5m?

Yes, the budgetary impact of this initiative is already part of the Horizon 2020 proposal as the EU contribution

will come out of the H2020 budget. The actual budget allocation will be subject to the outcome of the H2020

decision and the financial commitments made by the participating countries.

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


7

(8) If so, will this IA serve also as an ex-ante evaluation, as required by the Financial Regulation? If not,provide information about the timing of the ex-ante evaluation.

Yes.

E. Evidence base, planning of further work and consultation

(1) What information and data are already available? Will existing IA and evaluation work be used?

A wide range of impact studies and reports touching both on the ongoing Eurostars programme and on itsfuture development have been already performed and are available. Those were both by independent

experts, by the Commission, by the Eureka secretariat and at national level. The main reports are listed

below:

a) Interim Evaluation of the Eurostars programme in 2011 by a group of 6 High Level Independent Experts

chaired by Ms Laperrouze, former MEP and former vice president of ITRE Committee (Dec 2010).

b) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Interim Evaluation of the

Eurostars Joint programme (COM (2011)186, 8 April 2011).

c) Eurostars Interim Report done by Eureka secretariat in 2010. This report is also based on a survey

conducted by the Eureka Secretariat to Eurostars registrants and a survey to other stakeholders, namely the

32 Eurostars High Level Representatives (26 answered)

d) Summary Report on two Workshops "Innovation in Small and Medium Enterprises" Brussels, 21 June 2011

and 12 July 2011.

e) "Eurostars Impact report", produced in June 2012 by the Eureka Secretariat and based also on Eurostars

projects final reports and a survey to Eurostars applicants

f) Eurostars 2 strategic paper endorsed in June 2012 by the Eureka Ministerial Conference

g) Conclusions from the annual conferences with the National Funding Bodies organised by EUREKA (last one

in January 2012) and from several Working Groups at the level of EUREKA National Programme Coordinators

and High Level Representatives on Eurostars 2

h) A number of National reports on the Eurostars programme and its impact at national level.

(2) What further information needs to be gathered, how will this be done (e.g. internally or by an externalcontractor), and by when?

The Eurostars 2 is the follow-up of an existing initiative which started in 2008. Since 2008 a wealth of

information and views from stakeholders has been collected. This includes hard data, evidences and a wide

range of stakeholders' views through open and targeted consultations, assessment reports and case studies

(see point 1 above). The collected information is considered comprehensive enough to formulate the impact

assessment of Eurostars 2 joint programme.

(3) What is the timing for the procurement process & the contract for any external contracts that you areplanning (e.g. for analytical studies, information gathering, etc.)?

Neither procurement process nor external contracts are foreseen.

(4) Is any particular communication or information activity foreseen? If so, what, and by when?

Only after the adoption of legislative proposal.

(5) Which stakeholders & experts have been or will be consulted, how, and at what stage?

An extensive number of consultations have already been performed during the last two years. They covered all

affected stakeholders, who had the possibility to comment on the definition of the main problems/barriers, on

issues linked to subsidiarity analysis, on possible future options and impacts.

In particular

Consultation of Eurostars Potential and actual final beneficiaries (SMEs, Research Institutes...)

Survey sent to 6209 Eurostars applicants (Eurostars Impact Report, done by EUREKA in June 2012). 853

answered, of which 505 were funded and 348 were not funded.

Final Reports received from 173 Eurostars participants (Eurostars Impact Report, done by EUREKA in June

2012). Out of the 173 final reports received, 126 were from R&D performing SMEs.

Interviews of Eurostars participants (Done by the Independent Experts in charge of the Eurostars Interim

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


8

Evaluation in 2010). 37 Interviews in 10 countries

Survey sent to 3182 Eurostars registrants (Eurostars Interim Report, done in May 2010 by the EUREKA

Secretariat). 442 answered, of which 238 had submitted a project application and 204 had not submitted an

application. Out of the 238 submitters, 141 have been funded.

These stakeholders have provided their feedback on the motivations and barriers to participation, reflecting

the expectations and the problems that the programme should address and indicating advantages and

disadvantages of the programme. They have expressed their opinion on the impact of the programme and

projects according to their own experience (funded or not funded projects) in qualitative and quantitative

terms, providing indication of the additionality of the programme itself.

Consultation of participating countries and implementing bodies (Eurostars national High Level

Representatives, National Funding Bodies…)

Surveys sent to 32 Eurostars High Level Representatives (Eurostars Interim Report, performed in May 2010

by the EUREKA Secretariat). 26 answered[2]

Interviews of Members States R&D Institutions (Performed by the the Independent Experts in charge of the

Eurostars Interim Evaluation in 2010). 17 Interviews in 10 countries[3]

Eurostars National Funding Body Annual Conference (Organised by EUREKA):

o In 2009 (40 participants); in 2010 (60 participants); in 2011 (80 participants); in 2012 (80 participants)

Eurostars 2 Working Groups (Organised by EUREKA)

o July 2010 - June 2011: 3 WGs meetings with 13 Members Countries represented. The outcome is the

Eurostars 2 Blueprint endorsed in June 2012 by EUREKA HLRs

o July 2011 - June 2012: 4 WGs meetings with 15 Members countries represented. The outcome is the

EUREKA Budapest Document on Eurostars 2 endorsed in June 2012 by EUREKA Ministers

- Upcoming High Level Representatives and National Programme Coordinators meeting (Izmir 6-8 November

2012) addressing specifically the main issues of the impact assessment (problem definition, subsidiarity, policy

options and impact)

Those consultations asked for opinions on issues linked to the implementation and impact of the ongoing

programme and on the viability of the "Eurostars" and art 185 model in the future and its possible different

developments in terms of target groups, budget, implementation modalities, etc. in the framework of the EU

support landscape. And this for all Eurostars countries

OPEN CONSULTATIONS

Open Consultation on art 185 and SME support measures as part of the public consultation on the "Green

Paper on a Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation Funding" – EC -February-

May 2011

Two sets of questions provided the possibility to get opinions on Eurostars and its future in the next

Framework Programme, namely those referring to art 185 and to the SME support. Questions were

deliberately kept 'generic' in order to allow for the maximum freedom in the answers. In addition, Eurostars

was addressed/mentioned in 70 of the 849 position papers responding to the Green paper.

The Green paper open consultation was followed by two open Workshops "Innovation in Small and Medium

Enterprises" in Brussels as follow-up to the Green Paper consultation:

- the open workshop on 21 June 2011 addressed mainly to experts of SME research and innovation from

European and national SME and industry associations, from SME support organisations and wider

stakeholders such as R&I institutions and academia, etc (70 participants)

- the open workshop on 12 July 2011, addressed to Member States Members of the FP7 SME Programme

Committee, participants from governmental bodies suggested by ERAC, SME National Contact Points, etc.(80

participants)

Those consultations provided the possibility to express an opinion on Eurostars in the overall context, via

specific questions on the way to enhance synergies between national and regional research an innovation

programmes be enhanced, including art 185 such as Eurostars, in relation also to the subsidiarity issue.

In addition, questions on possible options in the definition of objectives and scope of Eurostars in the future

[2] AT,BE,CH,CY,CZ,DE,DK,EE,ES,FI,FR,GR,HR,HU,IE,IL,IT,LV,NL,NO,PL,PT,SE,SK,TR,UK

[3] see list P62 of the Interim Evaluation Report

7/27/2019 2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En


9

programmes were also addressed.

Open Consultation on cross-border operation in research (in particular joint research programmes such as

Eurostars) as part of the public consultation on the ERA framework (EC -Sept-November 2011)

Open consultation through the Annual Joint programme event in 2011(November 2011)

Part of the consultation and of the event was intended to collect experiences and opinions to formulate

recommendations for the design of future versions of instruments (ERA-NETs, ERA-NET PLUS initiatives, Art.

185 initiatives, JPIs) capable of realising the ERA and tackling major societal challenges. A specific session of

the event was dedicated also to Eurostars.

Open consultation through the European parliament's STOA panel meeting + EP Dinner Debate on

"Governance Mechanisms for research and Innovation" (May 2011)

Debate focussed on Eurostars programme's cost-effectiveness, sustainability and alignment with Europe 2020

strategy.

Documents

2013 Rtd 005 Eurostars2 En