The first steps in Europe 1/2

1. The evolution of European security research and innovation programmes:changing purposes and rationales Jean-Marc Suchier ETTIS R&I strategies and policy priorities in new mission-oriented programs: The case of security” Brussels, 18 September 2014

2. The first steps in Europe 1/2 • Situation of security research in 2000 • Not covered at EU level • No national programme • The triggers • End of Cold War • Development of international terrorism: it can strike anywhere • September 11, 2001 • 12/12/2003 - European Council document : “European Security strategy” “A secure Europe in a better World” • We need new security instruments • We need common instruments for all Member States

3. The first steps in Europe 2/2 • March 2004 - Recommendations from Group of Personalities (GOP) to develop a European Security Research Programme (ESRP) • For improving European security • For improving European competitiveness • In full respect of civil liberties and ethical principals • ESRP must • Be complementary to nationals efforts • Finance mission oriented research from capability to demonstrator projects • Be focused on technology • Technology is not security, but no there is security without technology • Take benefit of dual civil/military research • Recommendation to put in place an advisory board to help prepare an agenda for implementation of ESRP

4. few comments on security context in 2003 1/2 • What is security ? • Vague and inconsistent definitions among Member States (MS) • Covers many different and disconnected domains • Who is in charge of security? • The Member States  security is under MS responsibility • With various organisation/management of security matters • EU defines security rules for a few domains (airports,..) • But MS decide on implementation • MS usually have very limited resources available for security investments • What are the key perceived threats? • Mainly terrorism and organised crime • Perception of “insecurity” widely dependant on country, culture, age,… and events • Societal aspects: only a concern to take in consideration

5. few comments on security context in 2003 2/2 • Who develops security solutions? • Mainly defence and aeronautic companies, located in a few MS • What is the security market? • Regulated • Operators invest in security solutions only to follow regulations • No ROI for security • Fragmented • MS defines their rules and protect their national market • No major investment from industry • Industry needs market visibility • In security, the market is mainly defined when regulation is clear and stable and when funding for implementation programme is available

7. Preparation of ESRP 1/2 • The Preparatory Action for Security Research (PASR) • A 3 year programme (2004-2006) before FP7 • Limited budget (15M€ /year) for small projects • Goals • To investigate a few research topics • To help defining the ESRP content • Outcome • Not very useful for preparing ESRP content, because of projects schedule • But helped putting in place a new security research community • Managed, at DG Entr, by a team with a successful experience in air transportation • ACARE, SRIA

8. Preparation of ESRP 2/2 • The European Security Research Advisory Board (ESRAB) 2005-2006 • 50 members from • Governmental agencies • Research labs • Industry • Tasked by EC to propose a content and priorities for ESRP • Focused on short term technology needs • No basic research, but applied research on existing technology for security solutions • Mission oriented • Border, Critical infrastructures, Crisis management,.. • Does not cover digital security (DG Infso) • Societal aspects covered in parallel (Security & Socierty) • Outcome (ESRAB report) • Good results for short term technology priorities • The societal aspects not seen as a major potential problem for security research • Good basis for the first calls of FP7 security theme (ERSP)

9. European Security and innovation forum • In parallel with ESRP, a new advisory board in place: ESRIF (2007-2009) • The goal: to define a strategic security research agenda (ESRIA) • For mid and long term needs • Based on the ACARE model • Concept of security covers man-made and natural catastrophic events • The main difficulty • No major European policy document yet published (beyond the high level definition of “European Security Strategy”) • Which strategy options to use for the agenda? • Outcome • A strong message requesting that societal aspects be of major concern in ESRP • DG Entr put in place a Societal Impact Expert Group (2008 – 2013) • A raising understanding that • Technology is only one of the parameter • Resilience is an important aspect of security • European citizens must be involved • A weak and almost useless “strategic agenda”

10. Status at FP7 ESRP completion • Overall, ESRP is a successful programme • >1,4B€, >200 funded projects • Modest impact on European security • Many new technology products • But limited real innovation • No major new security solutions so far • It takes years from research to innovation • Raising understanding that societal issues are crucial • The weaknesses • Work programme more a concatenation of MS needs than answer to EU policies • Lack of fast track mechanism • Very difficult to build a long term strategy in security

11. Towards Horizon 2020 • Focused on societal challenges (Secure societies) , and pushing for • More innovation • Looking for higher TRLs • PCP (Pre Commercial Procurement) and PPI (Public Procurement of Innovative solutions) • Deeper cooperation of all stakeholders • Enhancement of the societal dimension • Covering Cyber security • Proposing a new fast track mechanism ? • A few open questions • Will PCPs and PPIs be efficient? • How to extract from EU policy initiatives effective research agendas? • How to effectively enhance the societal dimension?  All topics of interest for ETTIS

12. Thank you for your attention