Upload
alexia-davidson
View
219
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Internationaal
Practical guidelines for Polish companies and researchers based on experiences of the FP 6 first call
Dr ir Matthijs SoedePoznan, 9 June 2003
Internationaal
Content
SWOT Analysis Framework Programme Type of projects – Instruments Experiences with FP6 Conclusions Recommendations
Internationaal
Strengths Funding for core R&D that we were going to do
anyway Helps to focus R&D strategy on what is needed by
supply chain and customers Access to partner's facilities and technologies ‘Soft' money (think of how much T/O would be
needed to generate this amount of profit) Positive cash flow Total budget of $XM far beyond what could be
achieved alone Prestige of being in an International project
Internationaal
Weaknesses Deadline too short to do a proper job Increasingly complex system, more Euro-speak
(easier to get national funding) High cost to prepare & low chance of success 15%? Can’t justify cost of preparing proposal but..... Not very flexible - 3-5 year contract/programme Involvement of competitors Inhibits N America/Pacific Rim collaborations Too much non-core activity compared to in-house
project
Internationaal
Opportunities Networking with supply chain and customers Interactions with new people and technologies
leading to new ideas Access to the EC and possible input to future
strategic planning Staff development Develop ideas and partnerships for new proposals Use as background to speed up other technology
developments Separate projects with some of the partners
Internationaal
Threats Liability due to non/bad performance of other
partners (especially for a $50M project?) Changing economic circumstances Changing technical priorities eg need to
troubleshoot production rather than R&D Impact of £-$ exchange rate Project has to be very large and ambitious. Perhaps too large/complex to work and too
ambitious 1 year delay in starting work eg others have filed
new patents Confidentiality amongst consortium
Internationaal
Type of projects - Instruments
Integrated Projects-to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific and
technological objectives by integration of different areas, competences, and resources
Network of Excellence-to tackle the fragmentation in research society by
integrating the critical mass of expertise STREPS
-new breakthrough projects
CRAFT/Collective research …
Internationaal
… among Participants … among funding bodies governments, contractors, industry, universities, research institutes, etc.
… across Activitiesfrom basic research
Support to SMEs Technology transfer
to dissemination and training…
… across Technical AreasDesign, life-cycle aspects,
Materials,
Processes,
Maintenance, repair, etc...
ObjectivesReal breakthroughs,Support to Industry,
Sustain. Development
Clear and Quantified Deliverables and Integration...
50% EC Funds
The “priority 3” IPs
Internationaal
Integration in IPs Each IP should comprise a coherent set of
components Internal architecture may vary depending on topic,
scope and managerial approach Forms of integration:
“vertical” - full value chain of stakeholders “horizontal” - multidisciplinarity “sectoral” - private/public “financial” - synergy with other schemes (EIB, national
or regional funds)
Internationaal
Evaluation Criteria IP
Relevance to Call 3/5Potential Impact 3/5S&T Excellence 4/5Quality of the Consortium 3/5Quality of the Management 3/5Mobilisation of Resources 3/5
24/30
Internationaal
Strengthening Europe’s excellence on a particular research topic
by integrating the critical mass of expertise needed
to provide European leadership and be a world force around a joint programme of activities
Tackling the fragmentation of European research where the main deliverable is a durable structuring
and shaping of how research is carried out in Europe
Spreading excellence beyond its partners
Network of Excellence
Internationaal
Joint programme of Activities in NoE
Joint Programme of Research Clear research strategy for 10-15 year
Joint Programme of Integration Financial, legal
Joint Programme of Spreading of Excellence Workshops, training,…
Internationaal
Joint programme of Activities in NoE
Joint Programme of Research Clear research strategy for 10-15 year
Joint Programme of Integration Financial, legal
Joint Programme of Spreading of Excellence Workshops, training,…
Internationaal
Relevance to call 3/5
Potential impact 3/5
Excellence of the participants 3/5
The JPA & Degree of integration 4/5
Organisation and management 3/5
20/25
Evaluation criteria NoE
Internationaal
Experiences in FP6
Too many proposals Type of instruments not clearly understood Not enough industry involved
Broad variety of research topics also for not high-tech industry
Internationaal 77 proposals retainedaround key topics
basicbasic
AppliedApplied
UniversityUniversity IndustryIndustry
36 NoEs
41 IPs Industrial machinery
Robotics
Micro-manufacturing
New material processing
Textile
P&P
Electronics
Coatings
Chemical technologies
Porous materials
Safety, health
Diagnosis imaging
Materials by design
Functional Intelligent Materials
Agro-Bio-Mats
Composites
From interfaces to tissue engineering
Medical systems
Instrumentation
Nano- fundamentals
Nanotubes Nano-particles
Av. Nbre Partners: 34
InternationaalCountry
N Industry N Partners %
AT 32 80 40,0%
DK 19 48 39,6%
FI 25 65 38,5%
NL 41 117 35,0%
DE 157 485 32,4%
IT 81 255 31,8%
UK 89 301 29,6%
GR 19 67 28,4%
SE 31 111 27,9%
BE 30 125 24,0%
FR 67 291 23,0%
CH 17 74 23,0%
ES 39 195 20,0%
PT 5 43 11,6%
PL 5 81 6,2%
Internationaal
Proposal Title Adaptive Landing Gears for Improved Impact Absorption
Aircraft safety
and security
STREP
Acronym: ADLAND
Internationaal
FP6 and Poland
Degree of participation is increasing compared to FP5
Participation of Industry should increase
Polish researchers are taking initiatives
Internationaal
Conclusions
FP6 is giving opportunities
Industry is still underperforming
Poland is improving