European Research Infrastructures in a time of crisis

European Research Infrastructures in a time of crisis by Costas Fotakis FORTH, Heraklion, Crete, Greece (e-mail: fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

HORIZON 2020 Three priorities: Excellent science Industrial leadership Societal challenges C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Priority 1: Excellent Science RIs is a key tool for capacity building for: • Europe to stay at the forefront of scientific and technological research in all fields. • forming poles of attraction for talented young researchers and prominent scientists (reversing the brain drain!). • providing high level of scientific and technical training • Europe to be a protagonist in tackling current global challenges (e.g. environmental and climatic issues, natural disasters etc.) • contributing to the competitiveness of European regions. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

However, • what are the options for RIs sustainability in the present economic environment? • the prime mission of RIs is serving scientific excellence. How can socio-economic benefits in different Member States be enhanced without compromising this mission? • How to enhance the regional and global impact of European RIs? • What should be the future initiatives of the Commission in supporting RIs towards the Innovation Union and “Horizon 2020” • What synergies should be established for the optimal use of European resources in developing and using RIs ? C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

European Research Infrastructures: A story over 20 years old • Although the need for RIs in Europe was recognized early, attempts to establish RIs by European countries in various fields failed, primarily due to lack of coherence and coordination. • The concept of “Transnational Access” to national RIs is established for the first time in FP2 with the “Large Installations Plan”. • With the advent of ERA, the need for world-class RIs in Europe becomes a key issue and the ESFRI is established for promoting a coherent and strategy led approach. • Nowadays RIs are at the center of the “Knowledge Triangle”. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Evolution of RIs from FP2 to FP7 • in FP7 the coverage of scientific domains is balanced. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

The current state Two approaches: • FP6 and FP7 have supported Integrated Actions (I3) of networks of existing RIs covering all fields of science through a bottom up approach • To date, more than 300 Ris provide TA within 60 networks which are expected to reach 100 by 2020 • Transnational Access is in the core of the RIs programe • The ESFRI Roadmap has been established on the basis of a top-down approach. • To date 48 RI are included in the ESFRI roadmap (including also e-RIs) and 20 more are expected by 2020. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Impact of Transnational Access Both quantitative and qualitative issues should be considered: • Relatively small number of researchers but high profile projects. • Differences in operational features: TA in the form of “Services” (e.g. Synchrotrons) or as “Collaborative Projects” (e.g. Lasers) serving the high end of the field. • There are RIs serving only a small number of users but in critical fields for European competitiveness (e.g. aerospace industry). • There are RIs, as the “e-Infrastructures”, serving broader scientific communities worldwide (e.g. GEANT). • RIs are environments which promote scientific excellence. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Research Infrastructures and scientific excellence In only one RI cluster: 15 Advanced and 10 Early Stage ERC Grants

RIs, Industry and Innovation • FP supported RIs link to the needs of Industry and Society, even if this link can not be as yet quantified. • • Industry as supplier, user and as an RI itself. • RIs also enable advanced knowledge creation and dissemination enhancing the probability of innovation. • Altogether the scientific culture prevailing in the RIs environments is conducive for serving industrial needs at high level and creating innovation as a result of forefront research. • • RIs may support both demand-driven innovation for current needs and scientificcuriosity-driven innovation for future applications. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

ESFRI roadmap Identifies 44 new (or major upgrade of) Research Infrastructures of pan-European interest The EC funds 3 additional projects from the CERN Council strategic roadmap for particle physics*

FP7 new concepts! • Targeted callsfor I3 proposals aiming to interface existing RIs to those pursued by ESFRI. • The “Risk Sharing Finance Facility” (RSFF)for joint funding through EC and EIB. • The “European Research Infrastructure Consortium” (ERIC)increasing flexibility by facilitating the cooperation of RIs as legal entities and creating several privileges (e.g. VAT exemption). • The “Regional Partner Infrastructures” for enhancing the impact of RIs and encountering socio-economic disparities. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

European Added Value through the RIs Programme • The Integrated (I3) Activities: • provide an effective frame for approaching the scientific frontiers in different fields and addressing scenarios for their long term development and their potential European role. • The ESFRI Roadmap: • attracted Member State’s attention to the importance of RIs and to the projects of the ESFRI roadmap • stimulated the development of national roadmaps and the setting-up of priorities in relation to the ESFRI roadmap • mobilised many countries to host an ESFRI project or participate in others C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Member States participation in e- RI projects

A real challenge : the sustainability of European RIs • A question of sustainability: 48 ESFRI projects, including e-RIs, are discussed in the context of a major economic crisis • requiring major financial investment (~20 b€) • long term commitment for operation (~2 b€/year) • Note: The total amount for RTD activities under Structural Funds is currently ~50b€, from which 9.8 b€, (i.e. 1.4 b€ per year) is allocated for “RTD infrastructures and centers of competence” • However: The impact in FP7 was rather limited! • Inherent complexity of the process of developing major projects in partnerships between several countries • many delays associated with international negotiations and discrepancies in national decision-making C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

A clear need for financial synergies MS EIB PS EC Costs (M€) SF FP Code MS: Member States SF: Structural Funds EC: European Commission FP: Framework Programme EIB: European Investment Bank PS: Private Sector

National RIs in Greece • Astroparticle Physics (NESTOR) • Astronomy (observatory with remote controlled telescope) • Marine Sciences (research vessels, submersibles, etc.) • Natural Disasters (Earthquakes) • Information Technology • Life Sciences, Biomedicine • Laser Technology • Social Sciences & Humanities • Other….

ESFRI: Participation of Greece in bold: supported by SF

RIs in Greece • Participation in the Preparatory Phase of 24 ESFRI projects • Funding of 13 national networks of RIs connected to ESFRI RIs: 31 M€ • e-Infrastructures: budget 20 M€ • 2 National Road Maps (2007, 2009) C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

From FP7 to Horizon 2020 • An increased budget, from around €1.7 billion (FP7) to €2.5 billion (Horizon 2020 – 2011 constant prices) • New activities to support the implementation and operation of world-class infrastructures such as ESFRI infrastructures • Continuation of the successful FP7 Integrating Activities (I3) • Reinforcement of the support to e-infrastructures • New objective of better exploiting the innovation potential and human capital of infrastructures • Synergies with Structural Funds through the concept of “Smart Specialization”

Linking HORIZON 2020 to Regional policies through “smart specialization” Smart Specialization as a damp Today: “Competitiveness” has replaced “Cohesion” which in cases may lead to undesirable side-effects

Some comments • “Smart specialization” relies on “prioritization” for a better use of resources. In a region with 30% unemployment what is the priority? • an exit strategy and a mechanism for adaptation should be forseen together with the commitment for “specialization”. • Need for openness: There is danger for the most innovative and groundbreaking research to be set aside! C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Socio-economic impact of RIs • TA alone is not adequate in establishing coherence (or competitiveness) at regional level: The formation of regional RI hubs, which provide good science, technology, talent and entrepreneurial challenges are important for having regional impact. • Activities within European RIs may accelerate processes which enhance the scientific and entrepreneurial culture in European regions. • The development and operation of RIs benefit primarily local and regional companies and provide new jobs at many levels. Overall European RIs form dynamic “eco-systems” which may provide prospects and opportunities to the most valuable asset of European regions: People! C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Example 1: the SPIRAL 2 ion accelerator

Example 2: The Laser Facility at FORTH in Crete (a member of the LASERLAB-Europe Network) Access provided during1990-2012 270 projects,440 researchers from 19 European countries in3043days of access

Socio - economic impact of IESL - FORTH • The Laser RI at FORTH has been the nucleus for the development of IESL-FORTH which has: • led to the creation of 240 jobs of mostly highly skilled personnel (administrative, technical, scientific) • the cost of salaries for these jobs is ~ 6.5 M €/year while the Regular Budget received from the State is ca. 2 M €/year! • apart from salaries, contributes directly to the local economy ~ 4 M €/year (consumables, services, scientific tourism etc) • a multiplier effect on local business and the establishment of 4 spinoff companies • become the pole of attraction of talented young researchers and prominent scientists in the region of Crete • contributed to the development of the University of Crete • created a “scientific school” with alumni and networks worldwide • a cultural, social and educational impact on the local community including outreach activities C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

RIs and Regional Policy Issues The “smart growth for Europe 2020” in a time of crisis should place emphasis on capacity building through: supporting RIs based on regional scientific excellence and talent thus optimizing the use of European resources and complementing the impact of major RIs. establishing networks of RIs for less research-intensive countries. supporting “Regional Partner Facilities” (RPFs)” forenhancing the impact of scientific talent and expertise in the Regions and the global impact of European RIs. Example: Greek researchers in 2012 (i.e. in a year of deep crisis) produced 9281 scientific papers with 1.13% of them at the top 1% of most cited papers worldwide (Nature, v.492, 324 (2012)). – A performance comparable to that of highly research active countries! • RPFs may be an effective way towards enhancing scientific and technological excellence and simultaneously countering societal, cultural and economic challenges at regional level. C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH (fotakis@iesl.forth.gr)

Priorities and Vision • Consolidate RIs as multi-disciplinary platforms for regional/global collaborations • Pool and reinforce regional capacities • Support international collaborations that are strategic for European scientific partnerships • Adopt adequate organizational and governance models

Future EU research: Which path to follow? • From thematic priorities to problem oriented Challenges? • Increased coordination of national budgets or strengthening of European institutions (EIT, ERC…)? • Balance between: • National versus European level? • Frontier research versus problem oriented research? • Collaboration versus competition? • Governance of ERA?

European Research Infrastructures in a time of crisis