MOBILISING EUROPEAN

RESEARCH FUNDS: THE HORIZON

2020 AND HORIZON EUROPE

PROGRAMMES

More needs to be done

2014-2024

Communication to the Finance Committee of the National Assembly

January 2025

2

Executive Summary

The European agenda for the first half of 2025 will be marked by negotiations on the

future multiyear research programme, against a backdrop where the

Draghi report

on

European competitiveness in september 2024 highlighted the risk of the EU falling behind the

world's leading economies. Against this backdrop, the Court carried out a survey in 2024 on

the mobilisation of European research funds, focusing on the two previous multiyear

programmes,

Horizon Europe

and

Horizon 2020

.

The level of return on Horizon Europe funding obtained by France varies

according to the pillars of the programme

The European Union has set up multiyear research funding programmes, the most

recent of which are Horizon 2020, with €79 billion for the pe

riod 2014-2020, and Horizon

Europe, with €95.5 billion for the period 2021

-

2027. Of the €95.5bn for this programme,

€24.5bn has already been allocated to around 9,000 projects in its first two years, including

€2.75bn to French projects. This latter amount

should be compared with French public funding,

which, on a comparable basis, was at least 13 times higher over the period, at around €36bn:

-

€15.3bn (€7.5bn in 2022 and €7.8bn in 2023) in budget appropriations for Programme

172, dedicated to funding multidisciplinary scientific and technological research;

-

€21bn committed in 2022 and 2023 for the first two years of the France 2030

programme, with a total budget of €54bn

.

The Court's analyses enable us to assess France's position in relation to its European

partners and the level of funding obtained in relation to the national contribution to the EU

budget, which represents 17.5 % of the EU budget. For the period from 2014 to 2023, our

country ranked third in Europe for Horizon 2020, with 11 % of funding obtained, behind

Germany (15 %) and the United Kingdom (12 %), and second in Europe for Horizon Europe,

with 12 % of funding, behind Germany (18 %).

Pillar 1 of Horizon Europe (€25 billion between 2021 and 2027) and its Horizon 2020

equivalent, concern fundamental research, in particular with the Calls for Proposals (CfPs) of

the European Research Council (ERC). In this area, France is improving its relative position

as a result of the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union. For the

Horizon Europe

programme

as a whole, it is now second behind Germany, whereas it was third behind

Germany and the UK for the

Horizon 2020 programme

. This performance is due above all to

the flagships of French research: researchers working in research units attached to major

national research operators, such as the CNRS, and major research universities are the most

successful. However, the performance achieved is well below the target of 17.5 % proposed

by the General Secretariat for European Affairs, despite a respectable success rate for calls

for projects, which calls for an increase in the number of French applications.

Pillar 2 of Horizon Europe (€53.5 billion between 2021 and 2027) and its Horizon 2020

equivalent are organised around six major applied research themes, which require

international

consortia

of researchers and companies to apply. France's performance in this

area is much weaker, except in areas where French public research is used to working with

the business world, such as space. For this pillar, France now ranks third in Europe behind

Germany and Spain, whereas it was ahead of Spain for Horizon 2020. The main reasons for

this are the lack of links between the worlds of public research and business and the

inadequacy of support structures for putting together and managing such applications.

3

Pillar 3 of Horizon Europe (€13.6 billion between 2021 and 2027) focuses on innovation.

France's performance in this area is satisfactory, ranking second behind Germany, with a

return rate of over 17.5 %. This is the main change in

Horizon Europe

compared to

Horizon

2020

, as European research policy has chosen to make a particular effort in favour of

innovation, by creating a specific pillar for this topic and providing it with significant funding.

The new European Commission is due to put forward proposals in the first half of 2025

for the multiyear research programme that will succeed

Horizon Europe

. In the light of past

results, if France were to advocate strengthening Pillar 1 to the detriment of Pillar 2, it would

run the risk of finding itself isolated in this position. On the contrary, it would be advisable to

mobilise the levers likely to improve France's performance under Pillar 2 and, more generally,

to strengthen the links between public research and the business world, which are essential

for the development of applied research.

Given the stakes involved and the Court's mixed assessment, it would be desirable for

an annual evaluation of France's performance, both quantitative and qualitative, in mobilising

European funds to be carried out and made public. This could be entrusted to the High Council

for Research and Higher Education (Hcéres), an independent body with in-depth knowledge

of the fabric of French research.

Action is needed to better manage the system, strengthen France's influence,

and better support and encourage researchers to move towards Europe

Since Horizon 2020, the national steering system has been improved, under the aegis

of the Directorate General for Research and Innovation (DGRI) of the Ministry of Higher

Education and Research for

Pillar 1 of Horizon Europe

, with the strengthening of the network

of National Contact Points (NCPs), which disseminate information to researchers in

government agencies. However, the central government has not drawn all the lessons from

the evaluation carried out in February 2016 by an interministerial mission to assess France's

participation in this programme. They must better manage the European research funding

system, in particular by strengthening interministerial coordination at the level of the General

Secretariat for European Affairs (SGAE) to better integrate research areas that do not fall under

the DGRI's remit and ensure greater consistency between national research policy and

European policy. In this respect, a new national action plan to improve French participation in

European research funding schemes (PAPFE) needs to be put in place, taking into account

the results of the previous 2018 plan, which was implemented late and monitored inadequately.

Businesses should also be more closely involved in the scheme, particularly for

collaborative projects under

Pillar 2

, which require the public research and business worlds to

work together. This will require greater commitment from Bpifrance and the competitive

clusters. Lastly, the steering system must have a clearly identified regional dimension, relying

in particular on regional innovation agencies, university innovation clusters and European-

scale competitive clusters that bring together public research and businesses.

The question of French influence within the European Union goes beyond the case of

European research policy. Nevertheless, the stakes in this area are high, because the project

proposed by the European Commission in the first half of 2025 will serve as the basis for

negotiations prior to the adoption of the European research programme that will succeed

Horizon Europe

. In order to prepare for this deadline, it would be advisable to strengthen the

expertise of France's Permanent Representation to the European Union (EUPR) and to make

better use of the network of national experts seconded to the Commission, who need to be

strengthened and better utilised.

The search for better support for researchers applying for

Horizon Europe

funding raises

different issues, depending on whether they are researchers from research organisations or

teacher-researchers from higher education, who most often work together in joint research

units or in companies. For researchers in the public sector, it appears that the national support

4

system run by the DGRI with the National Contact Points (NCPs) is relevant and effective. In

addition, financial monitoring is satisfactory, as very little funding has to be returned following

EU audits. On the other hand, we need to overcome the characteristics of the French public

research landscape, in which, on the one hand, the major research bodies and universities

have support systems for putting together applications and managing European research

contracts, often thanks to pooled resources, while on the other, many isolated researchers

remain at a loss, due to the lack of sufficiently structured local support. In addition, the very

objective of applying for European funding is not systematically included among those given

by the State to its public operators, nor is it systematically included in the agreements on

objectives and resources signed by the State with these bodies or the evaluations thereof.

Companies often have to organise their own applications, which gives an advantage to large

groups familiar with the intricacies of Europe and to innovative companies already involved in

research networks or benefiting from the support of specialist consultancy firms. For the others,

while

Pillar 3

applications are achieving good results, the support mechanisms for

Pillar 2

are

still inadequate, due to the lack of an identified contact who can put innovative companies in

touch with the world of public research in order to form a

consortium

, which is a

sine qua non

for applications to projects under this pillar.

Measures to encourage researchers to apply for European funding must therefore be

stepped up in order to limit the effects of the abundant national funding that the Court's work

has highlighted. The national funding provided for in the multiyear research programming law

of December 2020 and in the France 2030 programme is not coordinated with European policy.

For example, it is simpler and less risky to apply for funding from the French National Research

Agency (ANR), rather than for ERC-type project funding, just as the results of an application

to

France 2030

are more predictable than setting up a

consortium

to apply to

Horizon Europe

Pillar 2

. To limit these effects, European applications should be taken into account more fully

in the career development of researchers, while an obligation in principle to apply first for

European funds in the relevant sectors before applying for national funding should at least be

studied. Finally, young researchers should be encouraged to make greater use of European

funding, while better analysing the reasons for failures, in order to capitalise on the experience

gained.

There is a threefold urgency to the subject at hand

Delicate negotiations on the future multiyear research plan to succeed

Horizon Europe

will begin in the first half of 2025, based on the proposal to be drawn up by the European

Commission by that date.

There are several reasons why we need to remobilise national forces to make the most

of this resource.

The report submitted by former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi in September 2024

1

once again highlights the gap between the ambitions of the Lisbon Strategy, set out 25 years

ago and aimed at mobilising 3% of the European Union's GDP for research, and the results

(2.27 % was actually mobilised in 2021). It also confirms that the European Union is falling

behind its main competitors, the United States and China, whose GDP is larger and growing

faster. This report is likely to lead the Commission to propose that the multiyear research

programme be integrated into a broader component aimed at improving the competitiveness

of the European economy, with a greater effort for applied research and innovation.

The negotiations will take place against a backdrop where competition for European

funding will intensify, with the UK having reached an agreement in 2024 allowing it to re-apply

for European research funding.

1

“

The future of European Competitiveness - A competitiveness strategy for Europe

”.

5

Finally, the continuation of the abundant national funding from which French public

research has benefited in recent years, in particular as a result of the 2020 multiyear research

programming law and the

France 2030 programme

, is not guaranteed given the worrying

situation of French public finances. This situation should force us all to redouble our efforts to

find funding to maintain the national research effort