"Lessons of excellence Learned from the ERC", por José Luís García, Rrepresentante Nacional del Comité de Programas para el ERC.

European
Research
Council
LESSONS OF EXCELLENCE
Centro de Formación de la Cooperación
Española en Montevideo
www.eshorizonte2020.es
PROF. JOSÉ LUIS GARCÍA
(CSIC)
National Representative at ERC
OE-MINECO
September
2017
LESSONS OF EXCELLENCE
LEARNED FROM THE ERC

THE POWER OF DREAMS
“II havehave aa dreamdream …… “
www.eshorizonte2020.esoficina europea

The idea for establishing the ERC first came
out of widespread discussions between
European scientists, scholars and research
umbrella organisations at a time when no
clear European mechanism to support basic
│ 3www.eshorizonte2020.esoficina europea
clear European mechanism to support basic
research on a broad front existed.
To address this problem, Europe had to
recognise the requirement for change and
establish the necessary institutional
structures for achieving it.

The innovation gap
The performance gap in
basic research
The EU share of the top 10 %
most cited scientific
publications is 37.5 % against a
US share of 48.9 % and in the
top 1% the figures are 37.3%
and 62.76% respectively
“A comparison with its main
competitors shows that the
innovation gap for the EU has
been declining but that the
rate of decline is slowing
down and the remaining gap
is still significant”
European Innovation Scoreboard 2008 (EC, 2009)
The R&D spending gap
The EU is spending every
year 0.8% of GDP less than
the US and 1.5% less than
Japan in R&D

2002
The debate gained momentum at political
level. European research ministers called
on EU Member States and the European
Commission to discuss the purpose and
scope of a Europe-wide research
council. Subsequently, an expert group
(ERCEG) group was convened under the
Danish EU Presidency to investigate the
viability of such a structure.
2003
A report from the ERC Expert
Group (ERCEG), chaired by
Professor Federico Mayor,
described how the ERC might take
shape.
2005
2005
ERCEG's recommendations won significant support from both the political and
scientific communities, which culminated in 2005 with the European Commission
proposing the establishment and operation of an autonomous ERC through the
'Ideas Programme' of the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013).
22 renowned researchers were selected as the founding members of the ERC
SC.
In December, the Scientific Council announced the election of its Chairman, Prof
Fotis Kafatos, and its two Vice-Chairs, Prof Helga Nowotny and Dr Daniel
Estève.

2006
The European Council gave the seal of approval to the ERC and its seven-
year € 7.5 billion budget.
2007
The European Research Council was officially launched at an inaugural
conference in Berlin hosted by the German EU Presidency and organised
jointly by the German Research Foundation DFG and the European
Commission. Researchers and stakeholders from over 30 countries were
attending the ERC launch to celebrate its establishment and discuss its
strategic and programmatic objectives.
The very first proposal focused on ERC Starting grants received a massive
response; 9167 applications have been submitted. This massive response
clearly underlines the huge expectations in the ERC by Europe's new
generation of research leaders.
2008
The ERC receives over 2000 proposals for the first Advanced Grants call.

OBJECTIVES
substantially strengthen and shape the
European research system
high quality peer review
establishment of international
benchmarks of success
provision of up-to-date information on
who is succeeding and why

By challenging Europe's brightest
minds, the ERC expects that its
grants will help to bring about new
and unpredictable scientific and
technological discoveries - the kind
technological discoveries - the kind
that can form the basis of new
industries, markets, and broader
social innovations of the future.

The ERC aims to:
Support the best of the best in Europe across all fields of
science, scholarship and engineering
Promote wholly investigator-driven, or 'bottom-up' frontier
research
Encourage the work of the established and next generation of
Encourage the work of the established and next generation of
independent top research leaders in Europe
Reward innovative proposals by placing emphasis on the quality
of the idea rather than the research area
Raise the status and visibility of European frontier research and
the very best researchers of today and tomorrow

The sole criterion for selection is
scientific excellence.
The aim is to recognise the best
ideas, and confer status and
ideas, and confer status and
visibility on the best brains in
Europe, while also attracting
talent from abroad.

The program we all dreamThe program we all dream

Big money
A single partner
All disciplines
Scientists from all countries
Portability of money
Short projectsShort projects
Grants differentiated by experience
Grants differentiated by disciplines
No previous team required
No previous lab required
Long-term funding

II. ERC and Horizon 2020
oficina europea www.eshorizonte2020.es

Budget: 30% of H2020
EIT
2%
Excellente
Science
Base
30%
Societal
Challenges
41%
JRC
3%
ERC 13.094,81 €
FET 2.695,99 €
MSCA 6.162,26 €
Industrial
Leadeship
24%
Infrastructures 2.488,01 €
TOTAL 24.441,07 €
54%
11%
25%
10%
ERC FET MCSA Infrastructures

Goals
10%
Excellent Science
ERC FET MCSA Infrastructures
• Frontier research by the best individual
teams
European Research Council
(ERC)
• Collaborative research to open new
fields of innovation
Future and Emerging
Technologies (FET)
54%
11%
25%
• Opportunities for training and career
development
Marie S. Curie Actions
(MSCA)
• (including e-infrastructure)
• Ensuring access to world-class
facilities
INFRASTRUCTURES

Budget

THE POWER OF MIRRORS
ERC works as a mirror where the EU countries can
compare the structure and competiveness of their
R&D systems

MIRROR [2007-2013] Grants per country
ERC Starting Grant
calls 2007-2013
ERC Advanced Grant
calls 2008-2013

Starting Grants
starters
(2-7 years after PhD) up
to € 2.0 Mio
Advanced Grants
track-record of
significant research
achievements in the
last 10 years
Consolidator Grants
consolidators
(7-12 years after PhD)
up to € 2.75 Mio
Standardization of Calls
to € 2.0 Mio
for 5 years
last 10 years
up to € 3.5 Mio
for 5 years
Synergy Grants 2 – 4 Principal
Investigators
up to € 14.0 Mio for 6 years
Proof-of-Concept
bridging gap between research - earliest stage
of marketable innovation
up to €150,000 for ERC grant holders
up to € 2.75 Mio
for 5 years

Starting
Grants
2-7 years after PhD
Advanced
Grants
significant research in
the last 10 years
Consolidator
Grants
7-12 years after PhD
SCIENTIFIC AGE VS BIOLOGICAL AGE
2-7 years after PhD
the last 10 years
7-12 years after PhD

Standardization of Panel Structure
Life Sciences
LS1 Molecular & Structural Biology &
Biochemistry
LS2 Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics
& Systems Biology
LS3 Cellular and Developmental Biology
LS4 Physiology, Pathophysiology &
Endocrinology
Social Sciences and Humanities
SH1 Individuals, Institutions & Markets
SH2 The Social World, Diversity and
Common Ground
SH3 Environment ,Space and Population
SH4 The Human Mind and its Complexity
SH5 Cultures & Cultural Production
SH6 The Study of the Human Past
LS5 Neurosciences & Neural Disorders
LS6 Immunity & Infection
LS7 Diagnostic tools, Therapies & Public
Health
LS8 Evolutionary, Population &
Environmental Biology
LS9 Applied Life Sciences &
Biotechnology
Physical Sciences & Engineering
PE1 Mathematics
PE2 Fundamental Constituents of Matter
PE3 Condensed Matter Physics
PE4 Physical & Analytical Chemical Sciences
PE5 Materials & Synthesis
PE6 Computer Science & Informatics
PE7 Systems & Communication Engineering
PE8 Products & Process Engineering
PE9 Universe Sciences
PE10 Earth System Science

Standardization of Proposal Templates
PART A – online forms
A1 Proposal and PI info
A2 Host Institution info
A3 Budget
PART B1 – submitted as .pdf
• Extended Synopsis 5 p.
• CV 2 p.
• Track Record 2 p.
PART B2 – submitted as .pdf
• Scientific Proposal 15 p.
Annexes – submitted as .pdf
• Statement of support of HI
• If applicable: explanatory
information on ethical issues;
copy of PhD (StG, CoG);
document for extension of
eligibility window (StG, CoG)

Standardization of Evaluation Processes
Panel Members
(10-15 experts)
Panel Meeting
Final Meeting
STEP I: Part B1 STEP2: B1+B2
A
B
(10-15 experts)
Proposal remotely
reviewed by 3-4 panel
members
Panel Meeting
A
B
C
Interviews
New revision by panel
members + external
referees
B

CONCEPT OF EXCELLENCE
At the frontiers of knowledge
Innovation fuelled by radical new knowledge
High-risk/high-gain research
vs
Incremental research

CONCEPT OF RESUBMISSION PENALTIES
Over-subscription causes different
Inclusion of penalties for resubmissions to
reduce the over-subscription
Over-subscription causes different
problems
• Reduction of the average proposals
quality
• Reduction of the evaluation quality
• Increase of the operational costs

CONCEPT OF INNOVATION
ERC Proof of Concept
Grants are designed to
support ERC grantees
with the commercial or
societal application of
societal application of
the results of their
funded research

MIMETIC CONCEPTS
Severo-Ochoa & María de Maeztu Program
Europe of Excellence Program
Young Researchers Program
Talent attraction Programs
• Ramón y Cajal
• ICREA
• Ikerbasque
• Oportunius

INTERNATIONALIZATION
Retain – Repatriate – Recruit
RECRUITMENT IS CLEARLY FAILING

Limited communication/diffusion activities
RECRUITMENT FAILING REASONS
Limited communication/diffusion activities
Language problems
Highly R&D endogamic systems
Distrust of research sustainability
Difficulties to obtain a permanent position
Difficulties for inter/intra countries mobility
(language)

SCIENTIFIC CONTROL
INDEPENDENCY OF FUNCTIONS
ERC PILLARSERC PILLARS
The Scientific Council
The Scientific Council
Independent scientific
governance
The Agency (ERCEA)
Managing
The European Commission
Money

Scientific Council
ScC
ERCEAEC
22 eminent scientists, covering all
disciplines
New President: JP Bourguignon

ADDITIONAL CONTROLS
Working Groups of ScC
Gender Balance
Open Access
Open Access
Innovation and Relations with Industry
Widening European Participation
Strengthening International
Participation
Key Performance Indicators

GENDER ISSUES
There are clearThere are clear
gendergender
gendergender
imbalances inimbalances in
the ERCthe ERC
programprogram

REASONS FOR GENDERREASONS FOR GENDER
IMBALANCESIMBALANCES
• Excessive weight of CV vs ideas in the ERC
evaluation system
evaluation system
• Low number of proposals by a distrust of
female researchers on the evaluation system
• Gender bias in the ERC evaluation procedures
• Imbalance of females in the evaluation panels
• Scientific areas with low attraction for female
researchers

WIDENING EU PARTICIPATION
participationparticipation
participationparticipation
imbalancesimbalances
Concentration inConcentration in
few HIsfew HIs

REASONS FOR HIREASONS FOR HI
PARTICIPATIONPARTICIPATION
IMBALANCESIMBALANCES
• Large imbalances in the structures of the R&D
systems
• Excessive weight of CV vs ideas in the ERC
evaluation system
• Low communication/diffusion activities
• HI bias in the ERC evaluation procedures
• Imbalance of reviewers in the evaluation
panels
• Unfair “OPAs”

INTERDISCIPLINARITY
problems toproblems to
problems toproblems to
promotepromote
interdisciplinaryinterdisciplinary
scientific ideasscientific ideas atat
the ERCthe ERC

REASONS FORREASONS FOR
INTERDISCIPLINARITYINTERDISCIPLINARITY
PROBLEMSPROBLEMS
• Classification of science in areas & panels
• Endogamic panels/lobbies
• Individuality of the proposals
• Solutions through Synergy Grants under
permanent discussion
• Solutions through Co-PIs failed
• Difficulties to find evaluators
• Extremely program competitiveness

INDIVIDUALITY vs NETWORKING
CHANGING THECHANGING THE
CURRENTCURRENT
CURRENTCURRENT
EUROPEANEUROPEAN
PARADIGM ABOUTPARADIGM ABOUT
THE HIGHERTHE HIGHER
EFFICIENCY OFEFFICIENCY OF
NETWORKINGNETWORKING
RESEARCHRESEARCH

STILL REMAIN
• SIMPLIFICATION. REDUCING
THE BUREAOCRACY
THE BUREAOCRACY
• ELIMINATION OF EQUIPMENT
AMORTIZATION
• JUSTIFICATION FLEXIBILITY
• EXCESSIVE REQUIREMENT
FOR MARKETING THE
PROPOSALS

Funding individuals - changing
organisations : the impact of the ERC
on universities
Jakob Edler; Daniela Frischer; Michaela
Glanz and Michael Stampfer

http://erc.europa.eu
Demo on line/servicio de revisión
http:// www.eshorizonte2020.es
InformationInformation
http:// www.eshorizonte2020.es
jluis.garcia@mineco.es (NR)
esther.rodriguez@oficinaeuropea.es (NCP)
ldrio@isciii.es (NCP)

"Lessons of excellence Learned from the ERC", por José Luís García, Rrepresentante Nacional del Comité de Programas para el ERC.

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to "Lessons of excellence Learned from the ERC", por José Luís García, Rrepresentante Nacional del Comité de Programas para el ERC.

More from Agencia Andaluza del Conocimiento

Recently uploaded

"Lessons of excellence Learned from the ERC", por José Luís García, Rrepresentante Nacional del Comité de Programas para el ERC.