The Guild publishes six recommendations for FP10

With a view to the Council Competitiveness next week, the Guild has published its reaction to the European Commission's budget proposal for the next Framework Programme for R&I (2028-34). The network of European research-led universities welcomes the budget for a standalone Horizon Europe, but addresses some key concerns with the proposal and its relation to the European Competitiveness Fund. In the paper, The Guild lists the following six priority areas addressing Members States and European Parliament:

1. Excellence: The Guild reasserts that FP10 must focus first and foremost on research excellence to produce breakthrough knowledge and innovation and attract the brightest minds with the most promising ideas. It is essential that research excellence remains a core evaluation criterion across the programme and the unique award criterion for ERC and MSCA grants. The Guild urges the Council and the Parliament to ensure research excellence is not undermined in any manner across FP10, including by provisions in the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF).
2. Ambition: The Guild commends the proposed 80% increase in the FP10 budget, bringing it to €175 billion. Recalling that the research and innovation sector has consistently advocated for a minimum of €200 billion to fully meet the programme’s ambitions, The Guild echoes Mario Draghi’s concerns that the current budget proposal “will fall short” in supporting breakthrough research and in achieving Europe’s goals for industrial competitiveness and societal resilience. Europe’s policymakers must not lose sight of these ambitions as the seek to agree on FP10.
3. Bottom-up curiosity-driven research: The curiosity-driven nature of the ERC and the MSCA, which are essential to their success in fostering pioneering research and attracting and retaining research talents in Europe, are not sufficiently safeguarded. The Guild calls for better protecting the autonomy of the ERC Scientific Council and limiting the opportunities for directionality in MSCA calls. It is also important that calls across FP10 are less prescriptive than in FP9 to leverage better researchers’ creativity.
4. Better connect to FP10: The ECF must be aligned with FP10. Horizon Europe must not be reduced to a tool for industrial policy alone. This means that Part 2 must finance competitiveness-oriented projects only if they are scientifically relevant. It also requires the optimal use of experts to translate political priorities to call texts at the frontiers of knowledge.
5. Open to the world: FP10 must preserve and promote scientific collaboration with institutions in third countries such as Norway, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, especially through their association to FP10. It is critical to recognise the huge value of collaboration with trusted partners – in Europe, but also beyond – for Europe’s strategic autonomy and scientific strength. We also call for maintaining the Africa Initiative under FP10 as a commendable example of research collaboration between the European Union and low- and middle-income countries.
6. Civilian by default: FP10 should be designed as a civilian programme by default, with carefully scoped provisions for dual-use applications where appropriate. Likewise, defence research must be strictly excluded from its scope.

The paper can be downloaded here:

The Guild’s reaction to the FP10 budget proposal