I have written a report on the future of Horizon Europe—the European Union’s research and innovation program—for the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, the think-tank of the center-right European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political group in the European Parliament.
Entitled Horizon: Competitiveness, the report looks at how Horizon Europe’s next “Framework Programme” (FP10) for the years beyond 2027 should look like, especially given the context of geopolitical volatility, declining European competitiveness, and the emergence of key enabling technologies in fields such as AI and biotech.
For reference, Horizon’s ninth Framework Programme (FP9) for 2021-2027 had a budget of €95.5 billion. The European Commission has proposed almost doubling this budget in FP10 to €175 billion for 2028-2034. Over the decades, the EU’s agricultural and later regional distribution funding have tended to relatively decline, while science funding has increased.
Overall, I argue for a less prescriptive approach to R&I funding, in favor of projects which grant more autonomy to top scientists, enable market mechanisms favoring innovation, and foster strategic autonomy vis-à-vis unreliable great powers.
Here’s a selection of the specific recommendations that may speak to people outside the Brussels Bubble, as well their rationales:
Act upon the pro-competitiveness recommendations of the Draghi report. These include eliminating barriers within the single market for innovation-intensive sectors such as data, capital markets, pharmaceuticals and biotech, and defense.
Rationale: Even the best-funded and most expertly-planned science policy cannot restore European competitiveness and strategic autonomy if the broader framework is debilitating. The EU needs to not only fund basic science but ensure there is an enabling economic framework in which investors can profitably develop and deploy technologies meeting societal demand. The U.S. and China’s superior virtuous circles of technocapitalist accumulation and capabilities are the main reason the EU has fallen progressively behind in more and more areas.
Empower scientists by maintaining Horizon as a standalone program, supporting curiosity-driven science by the best research teams, making calls less prescriptive for basic research, and simplifying reporting requirements.
Rationale: There is a strong case for funding basic scientific research whose future applications cannot be predicted. Those most knowledgeable about the potential next great breakthroughs along the scientific frontier are scientists. As such, funders should provide them with significant leeway and not hamper their work with unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles.
Enable dual-use (military/civilian) R&I by not labeling research areas as dual-use within Horizon Europe, while giving the European Commission discretion to limit cooperation with particular countries for sensitive projects.
Rationale: In the current geopolitical context—in particular the Russian threat and U.S. unpredictability—EU science funding must also support European nations’ military autonomy and capabilities.
Empower business and better reflect market demand by enhancing co-financing mechanisms to ensure private actors have skin in the game; ensuring research infrastructures serve both academia and industry, with modulated fees for services to enable price mechanisms while facilitating access for small and medium-sized enterprises and startups; and increasing the share of industrial fellowships and encouraging industry placements in key technological sectors within the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (the EU’s doctoral and postdoctoral training and exchange program).
Rationale: These aims to increase Horizon Europe projects’ economic and industrial applications and, where possible, ensure these correspond to real economic needs through private co-financing and price mechanisms.
Unify markets through standardization by embedding standardization in R&I calls, such as through standards impact assessments and work packages funding participation in standardization bodies, and by maximizing the Brussels Effect by setting standards that can be emulated by third-country actors, and, where relevant, making standardization projects open to third-country participation.
Rationale: Standardization and enabling seamless trade among diverse nation-states are perhaps the EU’s greatest technical achievement. Horizon projects can enable the multi-stakeholder collaboration needed to set standards in complex fields like health data or telecomms not only within the EU, but across other countries as well, setting potential global standards.
Securing multilateralism by developing and deepening Horizon Europe partnership agreements with friendly states, including those with different political systems provided these are stable, lawful, and respectful of EU interests, and developing mega-projects and infrastructure open to contributions and usage by friendly states (such as supercomputers or biomedical research infrastructure).
Rationale: Partnership agreements enable third-country researchers to participate in Horizon projects. The EU should increase alignment and cooperation with scientific middle powers who have a shared interest in a predictable, rules-based international order and in reducing dependence on unpredictable great powers. Relevant countries include the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, and perhaps the Gulf states.
Maximize brain gain by upgrading the EU’s top-10 universities to be competitive in global rankings and establish a ‘Sakharov Fellowship’ encouraging scientific refugees from systemic rivals and dysfunctional autocracies.
Rationale: Human capital—brains and talent—are the most basic ingredient needed for techno-scientific innovation and competitiveness. Reception of rivals’ scientists, innovators, and educated class generally kills two birds with one stone: weakening the rivals’ capabilities, while strengthening one’s own (see the U.S.’s Operation Paperclip). Spy risks aside, I continue to be surprised that EU nations have not encouraged mass immigration of educated people from Russia: the EU’s superior quality of life, wages, and research institutions could be highly attractive to many Russians, all while weakening Putin’s power base and strengthening the EU economy.
Fund ethics and foresight activities in relevant Horizon calls.
Rationale: We need to explore the ethical, legal and, social implications of transformative technologies such as AI, virtual reality, and biotech to ensure these foster human flourishing.