BETA


2009/2243(INI) Report on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead REGI VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert (icon: PPE PPE) DE ANGELIS Francesco (icon: S&D S&D), THEURER Michael (icon: ALDE ALDE), SCHROEDTER Elisabeth (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), VLASÁK Oldřich (icon: ECR ECR)
Committee Opinion ITRE CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo (icon: ALDE ALDE) Vicky FORD (icon: ECR ECR), Hermann WINKLER (icon: PPE PPE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 142-p2

Events

2010/09/16
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2010/05/20
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2010/05/20
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 559 votes to 18, with 36 abstentions, a resolution on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union.

Members recall that European support for research and innovation is primarily provided through research, innovation and cohesion policy, the main instruments of these being the Structural Funds, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). They note that the complexity of today’s challenges calls for an integrated mix of these policies and that the knowledge society requires, more than just an aggregation of the activities of the different sectors, a synergy between agents and instruments , which is vital so that they reinforce each other and support the sustainable implementation of research and innovation projects, delivering a better valorisation of research outcomes in the form of concrete product ideas in the regions.

While some elements of the architecture of these instruments, such as the same time frame and alignment with the Lisbon agenda, allow for synergies, there are still differences, such as different legal bases, thematic versus territorial focus, and shared versus centralised management.

Cohesion policy objectives as regards research and innovation : Parliament considers it important to coordinate Community policies that play a role in achieving economic, social and territorial cohesion. It believes it is necessary to undertake a closer analysis of their impact on the territory and on cohesion with a view to foster effective synergies and to identify and promote the most suitable means at European level of supporting local and regional investment in innovation. It recalls the need to take account of the different social and economic circumstances of the three types of regions (convergence, transition and competitiveness), and the variations in creative and innovative capacity and entrepreneurial spirit.

The resolution welcomes the fact that new financing methods exist and underlines the potential of the JEREMIE initiative and the Risk Sharing Finance Facility of the Commission and the European Investment Bank Group in boosting financing opportunities for innovative enterprises. Parliament also highlights the great potential of cities in pursuing research and innovation.

Synergies between Structural Funds, FP7 and CIP : Parliament insists that effective innovation depends on the closeness of the synergies obtained and regret that existing opportunities for such synergies in funding are still not well known . Both regions and Member States are called upon to step up efforts to improve communication.

In order for synergy to work well, Members consider that different national, regional and local bodies managing FP7, CIP and Structural Funds have to be aware of the possibilities offered by each of these instruments and ask for better coordination between these actors and policies. They stress that the instruments can be combined to cover either complementary but separate activities, as in the case of research infrastructure, or consecutive parts of related projects, such as the development and follow-up of a new research idea, as well as projects within the same network or cluster.

Parliament notes with satisfaction the Practical Guide to EU Funding Opportunities for Research and Innovation and recommends that in future such guidance notes be provided immediately after the legislative frameworks come into effect. The Commission is called upon to act as a facilitator, promoting the exchange of good practices, and to evaluate the possibility of providing additional expert support on Community funding opportunities through ex-ante guidance notes and a ‘user’s manual’ for the practical management and administration of research and innovation projects with a view to achieving the intended results.

Recommendations with a view to the next programming period : the resolution includes recommendations with a view to the next programming period . It stresses the need to review and consolidate the role of the EU instruments that support innovation, namely the Structural Funds, the EAFRD, the Framework Programme for Research and Development, the CIP and the SET plan, with a view to rationalising administrative procedures, facilitating access to funding, especially for SMEs, and introducing innovative incentive mechanisms based on achieving objectives linked to intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as to promoting closer cooperation with the EIB.

Members consider that the Structural Funds are the appropriate instrument for supporting local and regional authorities in their endeavours to promote creativity and innovation. They underline the need for greater flexibility to ensure the swift use of this funding for purposes of promoting innovative business initiatives. They also consider that cities and regions should pursue smart and sustainable specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs.

Pointing out that transnational cooperation is the essence of FP7 and CIP, and that territorial cooperation (via transnational, interregional and cross-border programmes) is mainstreamed in the Structural Funds, Members call on the Commission to: (i) reinforce the European territorial cooperation objective in the future , through its further mainstreaming; (ii) invites the Commission to evaluate the possibilities of enhancing territorial cooperation in the field of innovation in each cohesion policy objective; points out that better knowledge of the results of FP7 and CIP at regional level would facilitate practical coordination between the EU Regional policy and these programmes; (iii) pay particular attention to the coordination between EU regional policy and the framework programmes for research and innovation (FP7, CIP).

The resolution underlines the need to harmonise the rules, procedures and practices (eligibility rules, standard unit costs, lump sums, etc.) governing different instruments and to ensure better coordination (of schedules of calls for proposals, themes and types of calls, etc.) and calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end.

The Commission is called upon to: (i) simplify the bureaucracy for the FP7 and CIP in order to strengthen the effects of synergies with the Structural Funds; (ii) continue its activities aimed at fostering synergy, and to keep the European Parliament informed on their evolution, particularly on the situation of vertical cooperation between the EU and national and regional entities.

Parliament is convinced that commitment by the political leadership is both a necessary precondition for research and innovation policy coherence and a tool to enhance it. With that in mind, it calls for the establishment of a strategic policy framework for research and innovation adjusted in the light of progress, new information and changing circumstances and consistent with national goals and priorities for economic and social development.

Documents
2010/05/20
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2010/05/19
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2010/05/04
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2010/05/04
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2010/04/27
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The Committee on Regional Development adopted an own-initiative report by Lambert van NISTELROOIJ (EPP, NL) on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union.

Members recall that European support for research and innovation is primarily provided through research, innovation and cohesion policy, the main instruments of these being the Structural Funds, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). They note that the complexity of today’s challenges calls for an integrated mix of these policies and that the knowledge society requires, more than just an aggregation of the activities of the different sectors, a synergy between agents and instruments , which is vital so that they reinforce each other and support the sustainable implementation of research and innovation projects, delivering a better valorisation of research outcomes in the form of concrete product ideas in the regions.

While some elements of the architecture of these instruments, such as the same time frame and alignment with the Lisbon agenda, allow for synergies, there are still differences, such as different legal bases, thematic versus territorial focus, and shared versus centralised management.

Members insist that effective innovation depends on the closeness of the synergies obtained and regret that existing opportunities for such synergies in funding are still not well known . Both regions and Member States are called upon to step up efforts to improve communication.

In order for synergy to work well, Members consider that different national, regional and local bodies managing FP7, CIP and Structural Funds have to be aware of the possibilities offered by each of these instruments and ask for better coordination between these actors and policies. They stress that the instruments can be combined to cover either complementary but separate activities, as in the case of research infrastructure, or consecutive parts of related projects, such as the development and follow-up of a new research idea, as well as projects within the same network or cluster.

The committee notes with satisfaction the Practical Guide to EU Funding Opportunities for Research and Innovation and recommends that in future such guidance notes be provided immediately after the legislative frameworks come into effect. The Commission is called upon to act as a facilitator, promoting the exchange of good practices, and to evaluate the possibility of providing additional expert support on Community funding opportunities through ex-ante guidance notes and a ‘user’s manual’ for the practical management and administration of research and innovation projects with a view to achieving the intended results.

The report includes recommendations with a view to the next programming period . It stresses the need to review and consolidate the role of the EU instruments that support innovation, namely the Structural Funds, the EAFRD, the Framework Programme for Research and Development, the CIP and the SET plan, with a view to rationalising administrative procedures, facilitating access to funding, especially for SMEs, and introducing innovative incentive mechanisms based on achieving objectives linked to intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as to promoting closer cooperation with the EIB.

Members consider that the Structural Funds are the appropriate instrument for supporting local and regional authorities in their endeavours to promote creativity and innovation. They underline the need for greater flexibility to ensure the swift use of this funding for purposes of promoting innovative business initiatives. They also consider that cities and regions should pursue smart and sustainable specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs.

Pointing out that transnational cooperation is the essence of FP7 and CIP, and that territorial cooperation (via transnational, interregional and cross-border programmes) is mainstreamed in the Structural Funds, Members call on the Commission to: (i) reinforce the European territorial cooperation objective in the future , through its further mainstreaming; (ii) invites the Commission to evaluate the possibilities of enhancing territorial cooperation in the field of innovation in each cohesion policy objective; points out that better knowledge of the results of FP7 and CIP at regional level would facilitate practical coordination between the EU Regional policy and these programmes; (iii) pay particular attention to the coordination between EU regional policy and the framework programmes for research and innovation (FP7, CIP).

The report underlines the need to harmonise the rules, procedures and practices (eligibility rules, standard unit costs, lump sums, etc.) governing different instruments and to ensure better coordination (of schedules of calls for proposals, themes and types of calls, etc.) and calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end.

The Commission is called upon to: (i) simplify the bureaucracy for the FP7 and CIP in order to strengthen the effects of synergies with the Structural Funds; (ii) continue its activities aimed at fostering synergy, and to keep the European Parliament informed on their evolution, particularly on the situation of vertical cooperation between the EU and national and regional entities.

2010/03/26
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/03/19
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/02/26
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2010/01/21
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2010/01/21
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2009/12/15
   EP - CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in ITRE
2009/10/06
   EP - VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in REGI

Documents

AmendmentsDossier
106 2009/2243(INI)
2010/02/26 ITRE 32 amendments...
source: PE-439.282
2010/03/26 REGI 74 amendments...
source: PE-440.028

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/associated
Old
True
New
 
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.313
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE439.313
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE431.061&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ITRE-AD-431061_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE440.028
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE440.028
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html
events/0/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/2/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/3
date
2010-05-04T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html title: A7-0138/2010
events/3
date
2010-05-04T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html title: A7-0138/2010
events/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100519&type=CRE
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20100519&type=CRE
events/6
date
2010-05-20T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0189_EN.html title: T7-0189/2010
summary
events/6
date
2010-05-20T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0189_EN.html title: T7-0189/2010
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 142-p2
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 132-p2
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2009-10-06T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
rapporteur
name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2009-12-15T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html
docs/4/body
EC
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0138_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-189
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0189_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2010-01-21T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: DE ANGELIS Francesco group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: Verts/ALE name: SCHROEDTER Elisabeth group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert
  • date: 2010-04-27T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: DE ANGELIS Francesco group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: Verts/ALE name: SCHROEDTER Elisabeth group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-05-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-05-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100519&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18327&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-189 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0189/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Regional and Urban Policy commissioner: HAHN Johannes
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2009-10-06T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ITRE
date
2009-12-15T00:00:00
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2009-12-15T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
REGI
date
2009-10-06T00:00:00
committee_full
Regional Development (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert
docs
  • date: 2010-02-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.313 title: PE439.313 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE431.061&secondRef=02 title: PE431.061 committee: ITRE type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE440.028 title: PE440.028 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-05-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN title: A7-0138/2010 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-09-16T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=18327&j=0&l=en title: SP(2010)4416 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2010-01-21T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-01-21T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2010-04-27T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Regional Development adopted an own-initiative report by Lambert van NISTELROOIJ (EPP, NL) on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union. Members recall that European support for research and innovation is primarily provided through research, innovation and cohesion policy, the main instruments of these being the Structural Funds, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). They note that the complexity of today’s challenges calls for an integrated mix of these policies and that the knowledge society requires, more than just an aggregation of the activities of the different sectors, a synergy between agents and instruments , which is vital so that they reinforce each other and support the sustainable implementation of research and innovation projects, delivering a better valorisation of research outcomes in the form of concrete product ideas in the regions. While some elements of the architecture of these instruments, such as the same time frame and alignment with the Lisbon agenda, allow for synergies, there are still differences, such as different legal bases, thematic versus territorial focus, and shared versus centralised management. Members insist that effective innovation depends on the closeness of the synergies obtained and regret that existing opportunities for such synergies in funding are still not well known . Both regions and Member States are called upon to step up efforts to improve communication. In order for synergy to work well, Members consider that different national, regional and local bodies managing FP7, CIP and Structural Funds have to be aware of the possibilities offered by each of these instruments and ask for better coordination between these actors and policies. They stress that the instruments can be combined to cover either complementary but separate activities, as in the case of research infrastructure, or consecutive parts of related projects, such as the development and follow-up of a new research idea, as well as projects within the same network or cluster. The committee notes with satisfaction the Practical Guide to EU Funding Opportunities for Research and Innovation and recommends that in future such guidance notes be provided immediately after the legislative frameworks come into effect. The Commission is called upon to act as a facilitator, promoting the exchange of good practices, and to evaluate the possibility of providing additional expert support on Community funding opportunities through ex-ante guidance notes and a ‘user’s manual’ for the practical management and administration of research and innovation projects with a view to achieving the intended results. The report includes recommendations with a view to the next programming period . It stresses the need to review and consolidate the role of the EU instruments that support innovation, namely the Structural Funds, the EAFRD, the Framework Programme for Research and Development, the CIP and the SET plan, with a view to rationalising administrative procedures, facilitating access to funding, especially for SMEs, and introducing innovative incentive mechanisms based on achieving objectives linked to intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as to promoting closer cooperation with the EIB. Members consider that the Structural Funds are the appropriate instrument for supporting local and regional authorities in their endeavours to promote creativity and innovation. They underline the need for greater flexibility to ensure the swift use of this funding for purposes of promoting innovative business initiatives. They also consider that cities and regions should pursue smart and sustainable specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs. Pointing out that transnational cooperation is the essence of FP7 and CIP, and that territorial cooperation (via transnational, interregional and cross-border programmes) is mainstreamed in the Structural Funds, Members call on the Commission to: (i) reinforce the European territorial cooperation objective in the future , through its further mainstreaming; (ii) invites the Commission to evaluate the possibilities of enhancing territorial cooperation in the field of innovation in each cohesion policy objective; points out that better knowledge of the results of FP7 and CIP at regional level would facilitate practical coordination between the EU Regional policy and these programmes; (iii) pay particular attention to the coordination between EU regional policy and the framework programmes for research and innovation (FP7, CIP). The report underlines the need to harmonise the rules, procedures and practices (eligibility rules, standard unit costs, lump sums, etc.) governing different instruments and to ensure better coordination (of schedules of calls for proposals, themes and types of calls, etc.) and calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end. The Commission is called upon to: (i) simplify the bureaucracy for the FP7 and CIP in order to strengthen the effects of synergies with the Structural Funds; (ii) continue its activities aimed at fostering synergy, and to keep the European Parliament informed on their evolution, particularly on the situation of vertical cooperation between the EU and national and regional entities.
  • date: 2010-05-04T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN title: A7-0138/2010
  • date: 2010-05-19T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100519&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18327&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-189 title: T7-0189/2010 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 559 votes to 18, with 36 abstentions, a resolution on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union. Members recall that European support for research and innovation is primarily provided through research, innovation and cohesion policy, the main instruments of these being the Structural Funds, the Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). They note that the complexity of today’s challenges calls for an integrated mix of these policies and that the knowledge society requires, more than just an aggregation of the activities of the different sectors, a synergy between agents and instruments , which is vital so that they reinforce each other and support the sustainable implementation of research and innovation projects, delivering a better valorisation of research outcomes in the form of concrete product ideas in the regions. While some elements of the architecture of these instruments, such as the same time frame and alignment with the Lisbon agenda, allow for synergies, there are still differences, such as different legal bases, thematic versus territorial focus, and shared versus centralised management. Cohesion policy objectives as regards research and innovation : Parliament considers it important to coordinate Community policies that play a role in achieving economic, social and territorial cohesion. It believes it is necessary to undertake a closer analysis of their impact on the territory and on cohesion with a view to foster effective synergies and to identify and promote the most suitable means at European level of supporting local and regional investment in innovation. It recalls the need to take account of the different social and economic circumstances of the three types of regions (convergence, transition and competitiveness), and the variations in creative and innovative capacity and entrepreneurial spirit. The resolution welcomes the fact that new financing methods exist and underlines the potential of the JEREMIE initiative and the Risk Sharing Finance Facility of the Commission and the European Investment Bank Group in boosting financing opportunities for innovative enterprises. Parliament also highlights the great potential of cities in pursuing research and innovation. Synergies between Structural Funds, FP7 and CIP : Parliament insists that effective innovation depends on the closeness of the synergies obtained and regret that existing opportunities for such synergies in funding are still not well known . Both regions and Member States are called upon to step up efforts to improve communication. In order for synergy to work well, Members consider that different national, regional and local bodies managing FP7, CIP and Structural Funds have to be aware of the possibilities offered by each of these instruments and ask for better coordination between these actors and policies. They stress that the instruments can be combined to cover either complementary but separate activities, as in the case of research infrastructure, or consecutive parts of related projects, such as the development and follow-up of a new research idea, as well as projects within the same network or cluster. Parliament notes with satisfaction the Practical Guide to EU Funding Opportunities for Research and Innovation and recommends that in future such guidance notes be provided immediately after the legislative frameworks come into effect. The Commission is called upon to act as a facilitator, promoting the exchange of good practices, and to evaluate the possibility of providing additional expert support on Community funding opportunities through ex-ante guidance notes and a ‘user’s manual’ for the practical management and administration of research and innovation projects with a view to achieving the intended results. Recommendations with a view to the next programming period : the resolution includes recommendations with a view to the next programming period . It stresses the need to review and consolidate the role of the EU instruments that support innovation, namely the Structural Funds, the EAFRD, the Framework Programme for Research and Development, the CIP and the SET plan, with a view to rationalising administrative procedures, facilitating access to funding, especially for SMEs, and introducing innovative incentive mechanisms based on achieving objectives linked to intelligent, sustainable and integrative growth, as well as to promoting closer cooperation with the EIB. Members consider that the Structural Funds are the appropriate instrument for supporting local and regional authorities in their endeavours to promote creativity and innovation. They underline the need for greater flexibility to ensure the swift use of this funding for purposes of promoting innovative business initiatives. They also consider that cities and regions should pursue smart and sustainable specialisation by defining a few innovation priorities based on the EU objectives and on their needs. Pointing out that transnational cooperation is the essence of FP7 and CIP, and that territorial cooperation (via transnational, interregional and cross-border programmes) is mainstreamed in the Structural Funds, Members call on the Commission to: (i) reinforce the European territorial cooperation objective in the future , through its further mainstreaming; (ii) invites the Commission to evaluate the possibilities of enhancing territorial cooperation in the field of innovation in each cohesion policy objective; points out that better knowledge of the results of FP7 and CIP at regional level would facilitate practical coordination between the EU Regional policy and these programmes; (iii) pay particular attention to the coordination between EU regional policy and the framework programmes for research and innovation (FP7, CIP). The resolution underlines the need to harmonise the rules, procedures and practices (eligibility rules, standard unit costs, lump sums, etc.) governing different instruments and to ensure better coordination (of schedules of calls for proposals, themes and types of calls, etc.) and calls on the Commission to explore possibilities to that end. The Commission is called upon to: (i) simplify the bureaucracy for the FP7 and CIP in order to strengthen the effects of synergies with the Structural Funds; (ii) continue its activities aimed at fostering synergy, and to keep the European Parliament informed on their evolution, particularly on the situation of vertical cooperation between the EU and national and regional entities. Parliament is convinced that commitment by the political leadership is both a necessary precondition for research and innovation policy coherence and a tool to enhance it. With that in mind, it calls for the establishment of a strategic policy framework for research and innovation adjusted in the light of progress, new information and changing circumstances and consistent with national goals and priorities for economic and social development.
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/regional_policy/index_en.htm title: Regional and Urban Policy commissioner: HAHN Johannes
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
REGI/7/01566
New
  • REGI/7/01566
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 132-p2
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 054
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 132-p2
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.50.02.01 EC, EU framework programme
  • 4.70.07 European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
New
3.50.02.01
EC, EU framework programme
4.70.07
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
procedure/subtype
Old
Implementation
New
  • Implementation
  • See also Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 2004/0167(COD)
procedure/summary
  • See also Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006
other/0/dg/title
Old
Regional Policy
New
Regional and Urban Policy
activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000
New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b
activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000
New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000
New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b
activities
  • date: 2010-01-21T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: DE ANGELIS Francesco group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: Verts/ALE name: SCHROEDTER Elisabeth group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert
  • date: 2010-04-27T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: DE ANGELIS Francesco group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: Verts/ALE name: SCHROEDTER Elisabeth group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-05-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-05-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100519&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18327&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-189 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0189/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2009-12-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CHATZIMARKAKIS Jorgo
  • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: DE ANGELIS Francesco group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: Verts/ALE name: SCHROEDTER Elisabeth group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/regional_policy/index_en.htm title: Regional Policy commissioner: HAHN Johannes
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
REGI/7/01566
reference
2009/2243(INI)
title
Report on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union
legal_basis
stage_reached
Procedure completed
summary
See also Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006
subtype
Implementation
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject