The evolving discussions on FP10, the EU’s next Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, highlight diverging priorities among member states, particularly within central and eastern Europe.
National Contact Points (NCPs) and position papers from countries like Czechia, Lithuania, and Poland emphasize the significance of increased funding, simplified application processes, and a greater focus on equitable access to research resources. The Czech NCPs advocate for a more streamlined and transparent structure, stressing the need for simplified financial models and improved communication on grant agreements. They also call for decoupling the Widening programme from broader European Research Area reforms, arguing this would enhance clarity and participation. Poland, similarly, seeks to expand the Widening programme, address overlaps in innovation agencies, and align FP10 with other EU initiatives to foster a more cohesive research environment.
Ukraine’s integration into FP10 is a crucial topic, particularly for countries like Lithuania and Poland, which emphasize support for dual-use technologies and specific measures to integrate Ukraine and Moldova. Lithuania calls for a stable, increased budget and greater emphasis on defense and critical technologies in light of regional security challenges. Both nations underline the importance of adapting FP10 to the geopolitical realities in eastern Europe, suggesting tailored integration strategies for countries near conflict zones. Poland also highlights the need for increased grant success rates and better coordination between EU and national funding agencies to bridge innovation gaps.
The Widening programme itself remains a contentious issue, with countries such as Malta and Romania focusing on boosting participation from underrepresented nations and mitigating brain drain. While Malta calls for dedicated grant schemes and simplified processes to support smaller states, Romania urges for salary equalization for researchers and upgraded state aid rules to facilitate fundamental research. Together, these perspectives reveal a complex mix of shared aspirations and localized priorities that will shape the debate over FP10’s design and implementation.