Secretary-General of The Guild reacts to Horizon Europe 2028+ proposal

Under the title 'Horizon Europe's retention is good news - but the fight isn't over yet', Jan Palmowski, Secretary General of The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities, has published an initial reaction to the Commission's FP10 proposals, from the association's perspective.

Mr. Palmowski first of all welcomes the fact that Horizon Europe will continue to be a stand-alone programme as well as the considerable budget increases compared to the current Framework Programme. These increases will have to be defended by all means against cuts the Council may wish to make, he states. He also welcomes the fact that scientific excellence will remain the overarching objective of the whole programme, as well as the sole criterion for MSCA and ERC funding, but criticises that commitment to scientific excellence is not so clear in many details in the text, particularly in relation to the ERC. Several provisions still need clarification, e.g. that the ERC will be required to respect the “corporate policies” of the Commission, or that in establishing an overall scientific strategy, the ERC Scientific Council is obliged to have regard to opportunities and “European scientific needs”. The Guild is equally critical of directionality in MSCA, which, “if specific needs arise”, may target specific thematic priorities, geographical locations or objectives “in the pursuit of the Union strategic autonomy”.

Regarding defence and dual-use research, which are no longer specifically excluded in the Framework Programme, the Guild regards it as essential for the Commission to ensure that the civilian focus of Horizon Europe prevails. Concerning the issue of the relationship between Pillar II and the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF), Mr. Palmowski welcomes the fact that Pillar II will follow the rules (such as those around excellence) of Horizon Europe, rather than the ECF, but criticises the Competitiveness Coordination Tool, which is to ensure synergies across both instruments and with Member States, stating the functioning of this tool still needs to be clarified.

The Guild's Secretary-General concludes that the Commission’s proposal is "a good place to start negotiations, with a strong budget, an appreciation of international collaboration and at least a rhetorical commitment to excellence across the board", and negotiators will have to make sure that the proposals’ clarity and ambitions are strengthened rather than weakened.

For more information:

The Guild - news

This article was originally published in Times Higher Education.