Transcript IST FP 5
Austria and the IST-Programme Remarks – Lessons Learnt IFIP IT-STAR-Meeting 16. Oct. 2003 Budapest Mag. Michael WIESMÜLLER Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 1/28 • INDEX • Some words on Austria • FP 5 (IST) – what happened + some results • Conclusions from FP 5 • FP 6 (IST) – what is new? • IST 6 Call 1 – main results • Lessons learnt • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 2/28 • Starting point: Austria Macro-Indicators • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 3/28 • ...just to remind you... http://www.austria.gv.at/ AUSTRIA EU-Member since 1995 Area .......................... 84.000 sq km Population ................ 8,1 Mill. GDP/capita ............... 27.000 $ (=rank 5 in EU 15) GERD/GDP .............. 1,95% (perhaps: 2,5% in 2005) BERD/GOVERD/OTH 40% - 40% - 20% GDP/EU-Share ......... 2,42% (2001) • D.................................. • S ................................. • NL................................ • FIN .............................. • DK .............................. • 23,9% • 2,9% • 4,7% • 2,1% • 1,6% • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 4/28 • Some remarks on AT-Innovationsystem http://www.tip.ac.at • a lot of highly innovative SME‘s • Growth of RTD > Growth of GDP • high productivity rate • low unemployment-rate (1999: Rank 2 in EU) • Gov. Programme in order to raise RTD/GDP (2,5% in 2005) • „lack“ of RTD-intensive large-industry (compared f.ex. with Scand, NL or IRL) • low rate of industry research (BERD) • prominent share of the public sector in R&D (GOVERD) • few RTD-employees • Industrial structure with emphasis on traditional (low- to mediumtech) sectors Austria‘s famous old structures/high-performance Paradox: AT is dominated by „traditional industries“ (metals, machinery, paper), yet has steep increase of productivity, GDP growth is over average, low unemployment, growing EU-market share a.s.o. • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 5/28 • IST in the 5th Frameworkprogramme • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 6/28 • IST and FP 5 – the dimensions Budgetbreakdown 5th FP Total: 13,6 Bill. € Austrian RTD-Expenditures (1999) Nuclear Energy JRC Quality of Life IHP Promotion of SME's 3,6 Bill. € Intern. Role Energy, Sustainable develop. IST Growth IST KA1: Systems and services for the citizen KA2: New methods of work + electronic commerce KA3: Multimedia content and tools KA4: Essential technologies and infrastructures CPA: Cross Programme Actions FET: Future and emerging technologies RN : Research Networks • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 7/28 • Keyfigures IST FP 5 EU Submitted proposals......................... Successful proposals........................ Submitted partners ........................... Successful partners .......................... Pass rate (rel. to proposals) ............ Funding (M€) ................................... Costs Partner (M€) .......................... Share funding NAS .......................... AT 10.549.......... 1.294 2.687 ........... 300 72.733 ......... 2.001 18.503 ......... 449 25,5% .......... 23,2% 3.463 ........... 82 5.983 ........... 126 2,7% • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 8/28 • IST FP 5 – an all over picture subm itted Proposals 3000 80% successful Proposals 2500 70% Succesrate 60% 2000 50% 1500 40% 30% 1000 20% 500 10% 0 0% KA1 KA2 KA3 KA4 CPA FET • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 9/28 • RN SUP IST FP 5 – Austrian Performance 300 80% subm itted Proposals successful Proposals 70% AT-Succesrate 250 EU-Succesrate 60% 200 50% 150 40% 30% 100 20% 50 10% 0 0% KA I KA II KA III KA IV CPA FET • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 10/28 • RN SUP IST FP 5 – Share of funding vs. share of GDP 30% 25% share of funding 20% GDP-Index (1998) 15% 10% 5% 0% D UK F I EL E B NL S A • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 11/28 • FIN DK P IRL L IST FP 5 – Cooperation NAS – EU 15 UK 100% S 90% P 80% NL 70% L IRL 60% I 50% FIN 40% F 30% EL 20% E DK 10% D 0% B BG CY CZ EE HU LT LV MT PL • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 12/28 • RO SI SK A IST in FP 5 – Some conclusions (1) • FP is proven mechanism for internationalisation and networking of RTD-players • Quantity of RTD-funding is highly relevant on national level • FP has advantages for smaller countries (competition under controlled conditions, fair access) • FP allows boost of national strenght • Good mix between focus and broad coverage • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 13/28 • IST in FP 5 – Some conclusions (2) • Share of funding to NAS-countries is very low (2,7% = approx. share of Sweden) • Too much „small stuff“ (2.700 Contracts!) • Time-to-contract problem: cycles of techn. developm. are shorter than the programme • Administrative overhead is tremendous (INFSO Staff: 1.050) • Impact on europ. competitiveness is too low • Missing link to national activities (coexistence instead of cooperation or intergration) • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 14/28 • IST in FP 6 What‘s new? • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 15/28 • FP 6 Budgets and structure Budget 6.RP (2002-2006): Thematic Priorities Total: 16,3 Bill. € Sustainable development Global change and ecosystems 6% Sustainable surface transport 5% Sustainable Energy Systems 7% Citizens and Governance in an open European knowledge-based society 2% Genomics and biotechnology for health Advanced genomics and its applications for health 10% Combating major diseases 10% Food safety and health risks 6% Aeronautics and space 10% Nanotechnologies, intelligent materials, and new production processes 12% • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 16/28 • Information Society technologies 3,6 32% Bill. € FP 5 vs. FP 6 5. RP 6. RP Actiontyps Instruments RTD-Projects Thematic Networks (TN) Accomp. Measures (AM) Take-ups .... 12 more Networks of Excellence (NoE) Integrated Projects (IP) STREPS Coordinationsactions (CA) Specific Support Actions (SSA) • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 17/28 • New Instruments stairways of excellence IST – FP 6 Call 1 First Conclusions, Statistics on funding & role of instruments • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 18/28 • Some draft conclusions form 1st Call • Despite new regulations: several projects with top-quality • Good coverage – good response to SO • Oversubscription in tolerable margins • IP: „center of gravity“ (60% of budget) • NoE: instrument in „steep lerning curve“ • Ratio STREP – IP/NoE 1:3 instead of 1:2 • Considerable cuts of Giga-Projects (> 40 Mill. €) • More industry and market driven • Shortage of IP/NoE over 48 month • SME-participation declining • Accession and Associated Countries: still low funding share • Lack of coordinators from large companies • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 19/28 • Keyfigures 1st IST-Call* *indicativ EU AT Submitted proposals......................... 1.397 ........... 331 Successful proposals........................ 236 ............ 61 Submitted partners ........................... 19.960 ........... 538 Successful partners........................... 4.098 ........... 122 Pass rate (rel. to proposals) ............. 17% ............ 21% Indicative funding (in Mill. €) ............ 1.071 ........... 25-30* Ratio instruments IP – NoE – old...... 57% - 18% - 25% Share funding ACC............................ 3% • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 20/28 • Instruments: where does the funding go to? 700 600 Funding in M€ 500 400 300 200 100 0 IP NoE STP • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 21/28 • SSA CA Results 1st Call: Projects - Instrument 800 25% 700 20% 600 500 15% Submissions 400 Succesful subm. 300 Successrate 10% 200 5% 100 0 0% IP NoE STP • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 22/28 • SSA CA AT- Performance – Projects and Instruments Submissions 140 Succesful subm. 120 Successrate Prg.-average 30% 25% AT- Successrate 100 20% 80 15% 60 10% 40 20 5% 0 0% IP NoE STP • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 23/28 • SSA CA SME-Performance (FP 5 – FP 6) 35% RP 5 30% RP 6 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Share submission Share successful submission • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 24/28 • Share funding Instruments: „Winner & Loser“ Distribution of Funding/Instruments/Countries (standardised to programme average/17 leading countries) 40% 30% 20% IP 10% NoE 0% Old Instr. -10% -20% -30% DE FR UK IT ES BE NL GR SE AT FI CH IL • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 25/28 • NO DK PT IE Instruments: „Winner & Loser“ ACC Distribution of Funding/Instruments/Country (standardised to programm-average/ACC Countries) 60% 40% IP 20% NoE 0% -20% Old Inst. -40% -60% PL HU CZ SI CY RO BG MT LT EE • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 26/28 • SK LV Lessons learnt & closing remarks • Concentrate forces on „big shots“ • Money is in the IP‘s • Create incentives for potential proposers AT-example: funding for proposal preparation • Improve information services to proposers at all levels • Build a good and reliable NCP-Network • Find strong EU-partners + try to establish long-term commitments • Improve networking at all levels • Enhance visibility of national excellence to EU-Memberstates • Integration is a long-term process • Get involved in strategic planning on EU-level • Try to mobilize Evaluators • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 27/28 • Contact Mag. Michael Wiesmüller Federal Ministry of Transport. Innovation and Technology Austrian ISTC-Delegate [email protected] Mag. Reinhard Goebl Federal Ministry of Transport. Innovation and Technology Austrian ISTC-Delegate [email protected] Dr. Klaus Bernhardt (NCP) BIT Austrian National Contact Point [email protected] • IT-STAR-Meeting Budapest • 28/28 •