Activities of António Fernando CORREIA DE CAMPOS related to 2011/2107(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
EU research and innovation funding (debate)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Takes the view that scientific excellence is the most important criterion for allocating competitive funding for research; however, acknowledges that the use made to date of structural funds for R&D has not yet produced enough satisfactory results in closing the research and innovation performance gap among Member States, highlights the importance of succeeding in this objective in order to avoid a two-speed European economy; is of the opinion that renewed approaches are necessary at European level to enhance R&D competitiveness in underperforming Member States; believes that the potential for European programmes to build up excellence across Europe by taking advantage of the learning opportunity offered by leading European R&D institutions has not yet been fully explored; calls on increased programme capacity for trans-national researcher training; stresses the need for new approaches to enable trans-national twinning arrangements among Universities and Research Organizations, envisaging institutional mutual learning on governance mechanisms, human resources and IPR policies, funding, education, research and innovation organizational schemes, and business and societal involvement;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Highlights the need to give full consideration to the important differences among the companies encompassed by the current definition of "SME", when formulating support instruments for innovation; stresses that innovation support should be prioritized to company developmental stages in which bottlenecks have been recognized, namely at the seed, start-up and early phases; highlights that small-sized companies are the main innovators in Europe and calls for support to venture capital funding for innovative enterprises; stresses the need to tailor new and existing instruments to take due account of the limited resources such companies dispose of, in order to deal with administrative and procedure barriers associated with European funding programmes; is of the opinion that successful programmes such as Eurostars have achieved an important experience in responding to the needs of innovative companies and therefore should be reinforced;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Believes that instruments such as the Joint Technology Initiatives play an important role in supporting industry- driven innovation; stresses the need to take effective measures in improving transparency and open access to such instruments by SMEs and the public research sector;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Notes that public procurement offers an untapped opportunity for promoting R&D-based innovation; stresses the need for new measures to support pre- commercial procurement and identify pre- commercial procurement opportunities;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new) – after subheading 5
Paragraph 23 a (new) – after subheading 5
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Considers that the Cooperation programme plays an essential role in promoting trans-national collaborative research across the EU; takes the view that top-down definition of narrow themes for calls for proposals hinders both scientific competition across institutions and private sector participation; calls on a more extended use of broader calls with the aim of boosting scientific excellence and involvement of research-driven SMEs and highlights the need for greater flexibility in consortia size definition;
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Notes that large-scale projects are often subject to heavy project administration and to bureaucratic burdens which hinder scientific output; favours a shift in balance towards smaller sized projects;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)
Paragraph 25 c (new)
25c. Considers the ERC as a case of success in promoting scientific excellence and the European Research Area; believes its success factors should be emulated across other instruments, whenever applicable; believes the size of the program should be significantly increased and this could be achieved both by a greater allocation of EU funds to the ERC, and by extending agreements with Member States for the national funding of ERC selected proposals;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 d (new)
Paragraph 25 d (new)
25d. Believes there is further potential for extending the scope of the ERC concept to collaborative and multidisciplinary research projects, provided they maintain a bottom-up nature and scientific excellence is kept as the major selection criterion;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 e (new)
Paragraph 25 e (new)
25e. Takes the view that priority large- scale research infrastructures are important pillars of the European Research Area and therefore EU funding should be extended after the preparatory phase, and linked to trans-national access and training of researchers;