ERAC discusses current ERA developments in Gdansk

On 12 and 13 June 2025, ERAC met for the second time this year, the meeting was held upon invitation of the Polish Council Presidency of the EU in Gdansk, Poland.

The meeting took place just over a month ahead of the dates for which the European Commission has announced the submission of its proposals for the next Multiannual Financial Framework. At the opening of the ERAC meeting, Director General for Research and Innovation Marc Le Maître confirmed the envisaged submission dates, specifying that there will be separate regulations for a Competitiveness Fund and the 10th Framework Programme for R&I and also a decision for a specific programme. Delegates were highly interested to learn more about the link between the next Framework Programme and the future Competitiveness Fund, however, the EC could not provide any information about this issue at this stage. The wait continues.

ERAC's first strategic discussion at this meeting revolved around the crucial questions of how to increase R&I investments, how to leverage private investments, and how to coordinate investment better in order to make it more effective. The discussion was organised in a new format, with four panellists providing short keynote speeches to kick-start the discussion. Barbara Weitgruber, the former ERAC Member States co-Chair, argued for strong national investment throughout Europe and emphasised the need for reforms and a long-term R&I policy perspective. Furthermore she underlined the need to leverage national research funding which makes up 90% of the total amount of R&D funding in the EU, while only 10% are accounted for by the Framework Programme - it will therefore be necessary to align funding from various sources along key strategic priorities. Alexandr Hobza, a member of Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné's cabinet, argued that the EU economy has its strengths mainly in mid-tech areas. Therefore, in order to escape the mid-tech trap, Europe would need to change its economy and invest more in science, focussing on cutting-edge technologies sectors. Mr. Hobza stressed that this means Europe needs to pool its resources and act together. Mateusz Gaczynski of the Polish Ministry of Funds and Regional Policy illustrated the successful case of Poland in using Cohesion funds for R&I, while Luke Georghiou from the Manchester Institute of Innovation Research used the example of a Policy Support Facility survey in Finland to explain the leveraging of more private R&D investment through targeted public investment.

The discussion following these inputs underlined the main points made by the panellists. Participants pointed out that while indeed we need more directed investments along critical technologies, we also need to further improve R&T infrastructures, including computing power, and to further improve the talent base and framework conditions. The importance of increasing mobility between the public/academic and private sectors was emphasised several times. Furthermore, several discussants highlighted the fact that an increase of investments in defence will also mean significant additional investments in R&I, as it is necessary to build up smart defence.

The next round of discussion dealt with the envisaged “ERA Act”. Two of the three potential strands of the “ERA Act”, namely stronger coordination of investments and an increased alignment along strategic priorities, had already been dealt with extensively in the first strategic discussion. Thus the tour the table about the ERA Act mainly dealt with the third strand of the ERA Act, i.e. addressing framework conditions and administrative barriers through legislation. The most frequently mentioned topics in the discussion were the mobility of researchers, research security, and freedom of scientific research. It seems however, that a lot of work is still required to elaborate a legally sound proposal of legislative measures which facilitates the effective removal of barriers for the fifth freedom.

The second day of the meeting started with a discussion on the issue of how to proceed with measures to overcome the innovation divide in the EU in the next MFF cycle. While participants widely shared the assessment that the “Widening Participation” measures in current and previous Framework Programmes were effective, the conclusions drawn were highly varied. While some delegates said that these measures should be continued because they were successful, others claimed that the success of these measures had created a new situation where such measures are either no longer needed at all, or are only needed for a fraction of the former group of countries eligible for participating in the Widening measures. Nonetheless, the discussion seemed to indicate that there is a good basis for a much more pragmatic and constructive discussion about measures to overcome the innovation divide in the next MFF cycle.

Finally ERAC adopted its Opinion on Research Infrastructures (RIs) and Technology Infrastructures (TIs) in Europe. The main recommendations of this ERAC Opinion, which will soon be publicly available, are the following:

• A coordinated EU-wide analysis is needed of RIs' and TIs' capacities, and an inventory of national/regional RIs and TIs mappings in strategic technologies and industrial sectors
• A visible and robust system of transnational access needs to be developed.
• ERAC considers that when it comes to TIs, it is critical to identify the needs of the industrial users and prioritise supporting critical technologies
• Increase the digitalisation and data sharing of the results obtained by the users of the infrastructures.
• ERAC considers that a dedicated governance framework for TIs is essential. Still, a staged approach could be most appropriate, given the early stage of development of a European policy on TIs and the lack of specific national strategies in many countries.
• This Opinion proposes specific directions for developing a lean umbrella coordination mechanism on RIs and TIs that would be efficient in terms of suggesting joint priorities and funding opportunities for the coherent European infrastructure ecosystem.
• remove legal, regulatory, and bureaucratic barriers, such as accounting separation of economic and non-economic activities and fragmented funding streams, that impede cross-border cooperation and access to infrastructures.