supporting sme - participation in research framework programmes

8/14/2019 Supporting SME - Participation in research framework programmes

1/32

SMESandRESEaRch:cREatingknowlEdgEfoRgRowth

SUPPORTING SMEPARTICIPATION IN RESEARCHFRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES


2/32

Interested in European research?Research*eu is our monthly magazine keeping you in touch with main developments (results, programmes, events, etc.). It is available inEnglish, French, German and Spanish. A free sample copy or free subscription can be obtained from:European CommissionDirectorate-General for ResearchCommunication UnitB-1049 BrusselsFax (32-2) 29-58220E-mail: [email protected]: http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Directorate-General for Research

SME Unit

E-mail: [email protected]

Contact: Martina Daly

European CommissionB-1049 Brussels

Tel. (32-2) 29-90645

Fax (32-2) 29-63261

E-mail: [email protected]


3/32

SMESandRESEaRch:cREatingknowlEdgEfoRgRowth

SUPPORTING SMEPARTICIPATION IN RESEARCHFRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES

Directorate-General for Research

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

2007


4/32

LEGAL NOTICE:

Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made ofthe following information.

The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the EuropeanCommission.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2007

ISBN 92-79-04552-0

European Communities, 2007Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in BelgiumPrintedonwhitechlorine-freePaPer

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answersto your questions about the European Union

Freephone number:00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

Pictures: Shutterstock


5/32

FROM FP6 TO FP7: LESSONS LEARNED, MEASURES TAKEN .....................................................................................................p 4

SME TASK FORCE REPORTS POSITIVE TRENDS IN FP6 ..............................................................................................................p 8

THE REAL DEAL: HEALTHY REFORMS FOR SERIOUS SMES .......................................................................................................p 10

CIP: HELPING EUROPEAN SMEs INNOVATE AND GROW ..................................................................................................... p 12

CASE STUDIES:Nanotechnology: small science strikes big deals................................................................................................................... p 14

Generating energy know-how for European SMEs ................................................................................................................ p 16

SMEs develop an appetite for business ............................................................................................................................... p 18

Networking rural SMEs to build knowledge and win business .................................................................................................p 20

What makes a high-growth winner? ...................................................................................................................................p 22

Collaboration for a sustainable future for EU foundries............................................................................................................p 24


6/32

While the architects of the EUs Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) were rmly committed to large-scale researchcollaboration as the means to achieve breakthrough results, they also retained a strong awareness of the need tosupport the involvement of SMEs.

As well as allocating substantial funds for SME-specic measures, the European Commission made a considerableeffort to encourage across-the-board participation of the smaller enterprises that are seen as dynamic drivers ofcompetitiveness and job creation in Europe. Despite this, some problems still remained unresolved. These wereaddressed by special actions introduced during the lifetime of FP6, resulting in an increase in SME requests forfunding.

The experience gained offered some useful lessons, which have been applied to good effect in making FP7 evenmore SME-friendly. The thematic priorities have been reviewed, the ceiling percentage of EU support raised, andthe nancial risk for small businesses reduced. A more adaptable approach to the framing of thematic strategies isforeseen and there is greater scope for exibility in the structuring of the various support mechanisms.

SMEs make up 99% of all EU enterprises,and provide around 75 million jobs. They aretherefore vital to delivering the growth andhigher employment objectives envisaged inthe relaunched Lisbon agenda for a successfulknowledge-based EU. Balancing the needto stimulate breakthrough innovation with

that of encouraging greater participation byknowledge-intensive small businesses, hastherefore been a high priority in the Communitysrecent RTD Framework Programmes.

FP6 (2002-2006) focused primarily on seventhematic priorities, selected as much on thegrounds that they are areas in which EU SMEsshow particular strengths, as because they aretopics of vital interest to Europes economy.

Life Sciences and Genomics, Information

Society Technologies, Nanotechnologies andNanosciences, Aeronautics and Space, Food

Safety and Quality, Sustainable Development,and Citizens and Governance, togetheraccounted for two-thirds of the total EUR 17.9billion budget. Of this, at least 15% (aroundEUR 1.865 billion) was earmarked for SMEs.

SCALE A dETERRENT?

It was expected that the large scale envisionedfor Integrated Projects (IPs) and Networks ofExcellence (NoEs) the instruments intendedto form the mainstay of the programme might deter small companies from seekingto initiate their own projects or join consortiabeing assembled in areas of interest to them.

Specic Targeted Research Projects (STREPs)were therefore included in the range ofinstruments applicable to the thematic

priorities. Smaller than IPs, these are shared-cost RTD and demonstration projects, similar to

those previously included in FP5 and known tobe favoured by SMEs. The purpose of STREPsis to prove the viability of new technologies,or to gain new knowledge about existingproducts, processes or services.

In fact, fears about the larger projects proved

to be unfounded, as shown by the latest reportfrom the SME Interservice Task Force, whichis responsible for monitoring progress in thisarea. STREPs accounted for 16.4% of SMEfunding, and although the gure for IPs waslower at 13.4%, it was in line with the overall13.6% recorded for SME applications acrossthe whole of FP6. NoEs accounted for only4%, which was unsurprising as these were notspecically designed for SME participation.

In addition, Economic and Technological

Intelligence (ETI) actions permitted innovationintermediaries to foster transnational SME

FROM FP6 TO FP7:

LESSONS LEARNEd,MEASURES TAKEN

FP6

FP7

/ SUPPORTING SME PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES


7/32

cooperation by organising networks, providingeconomic and technological intelligence, andconsolidating information services.

Cooperative Research (known in FP5 asCRAFT) continued to support SMEs that had acapacity to innovate but limited capability tocarry out their own research. This programmeenabled them to outsource the work to partners

such as universities and research centres. In asimilar fashion, Collective Research fundedthe collaboration of SME associations orgroupings.

In order to ease SME entry, the network ofNational Contact Points (NCPs), set up underFP5 was expanded in FP6, providing on-the-spot information and assistance to potentialparticipants and contractors in the variousMember States.

EARLy SHORTFALLAddRESSEdIn a November 2003 interview, XabierGoenaga, then head of the Research DGsResearch and SMEs Unit, noted that actualSME requests for funding under proposalsfrom the rst FP6 call amounted to 13%of the available budget. This gure (laterrevised downwards to 12.4%) was seen asencouraging, but not sufcient.

Data provided by the SME Interservice Task

Force showed that responses differed betweenthe thematic priorities, with Life Sciences,

Aeronautics, Food Quality and Safety, andGlobal Change attracting lower interest.

Indeed, for thematic priority 1, Life Sciencesand Genomics, applications languished ataround only 10% of the budget for the rsttwo calls. A working party set up to analysethe reasons for this lack of interest identied anumber of contributory factors.

FP6 focused on genomics, leaving outseveral areas where the biotechnologyindustry is most active.Academics are more familiar with EUfunding schemes, but focus less onexploitation and on the need for SMEparticipation.SMEs are frequently unaware of EUfunding opportunities.SMEs are often discouraged by theprocedures.SMEs prefer smaller projects and broader

topics.

The Commission therefore planned a seriesof supplementary measures designed to boostthe take-up across all seven priorities. One ofthese was to publish topping-up calls, invitingSMEs to join the consortia of establishedIPs, which could be accomplished with onlymodest effort on their own part.

Another was to extend the use of SMEIntegrated Projects (SME-IPs), as initially

applied in a EUR 40 million call under thethird thematic priority, Nanotechnology,

Materials and Production Processes. SME-IPswere established in areas of part icular interestto small companies with a stipulated SMEparticipation of at least 50%. These initiativesare smaller than regular IPs, and while largecompanies are permitted to join as consortiummembers, they are SME-led.

SUCCESSFUL INTERvENTION

The Health Directorates own response to itsearly undersubscription was to increase thenumber of SME-relevant topics in its third call,and to implement a range of actions to increasevisibility and support. As a consequence, SMEparticipation rose to the target 15%.

In the fourth round, it introduced a specialcall for SME-STREPs, to which it assignedone third of its annual budget, and againpursued a variety of imaginative supportingactions. From the 355 submitted proposals onthis occasion, 86 were accepted. Of these,46% were coordinated by SMEs, which alsorepresented 40.6% of consortium membershipand received 43% of the available funding.

In combination with the other 2005 Healthcalls, the total SME share amounted to a

remarkable 22%! A report on the success of theHealth Directorate appears in this brochure.

As the latest report of the SME InterserviceTask Force (accompanying article) conrms,available gures show a growth in overallSME involvement over the rst years of FP6.With the continued effect of exible andproactive measures such as those describedabove, the SME-requested funding increasedfrom 12.4% to 15.2% for the second half ofFP6.

FROM FP6 TO FP7/


8/32

FP7 SETS NEW dIRECTIONS

FP7 (2007-2013) comes with a substantialbudget increase to EUR 54.5 billion (morethan double that of FP6), and signicantstructural changes that will stimulate an evenhigher level of SME integration.

Measures favouring SME participation were inplace from the outset, including the selectionof SME-relevant topics, SME-dedicated callsand an earmarked budget within speciccalls.

REvISEd STRUCTURE

Replacing the former thematic priorities isa series of four distinct but complementaryprogrammes:

Cooperation, targeting leadership in keyareas of science and technology, including

the social sciences and humanities;Ieas, fostering competition andexcellence at the frontiers of fundamentalresearch;People, seeking to enhance the mobilityand career development of researchers;Capacities, aiming to ensure scienticand technological capacity-building.

SMEs will actively be encouraged to takepart in all four programmes. However, thegreatest opportunities are likely to arise in

Cooperation which has been allocatedaround 60% of the total budget. This is

divided among 10 subthemes, which areoperationally autonomous but make provisionfor cross-cutting joint activities.

The mix of funding instruments has also beenadjusted to take account of a widely-expressedview that there should be a reduced numberof partners in consortia and a greater focus onsmaller projects than was the case under FP6.

Networks of Excellence (NoEs) continuelargely unchanged, as do the pre-existingcoordination and support actions. ButCollaborative Projects (CPs) now blur thedistinction between IP and STREP in termsof scale. A STREP-like model will also beemployed for the 10 Cooperation themes.

Cooperative Research and CollectiveResearch are incorporated into a Researchfor the benet of SMEs theme within theCapacities programme. With its own EUR

1.3 billion budget, this aims to strengthenthe innovative capacity of medium- to low-tech enterprises by helping them to outsourceresearch activities and participate intransnational networks.

In FP7 terminology, the two SME-specicmeasures are described as follows:

Research for SMEs, supporting smallgroups of innovative SMEs to tacklecommon or complementary technologicalissues;

Research for SME associations, enablingassociations and groupings to develop

technical solutions to problems shared bylarge numbers of SMEs in specic industrialsectors or value-chain segments.

MORE OPPORTUNITIES

Also included among the SME-specicprovisions are measures designed tohelp national and regional SME research

programmes enter into transnationalcooperations, with added value for theCommunity as a whole. Actions basedon Article 169 of the EC treaty supportsuch integration by means of Europeanparticipation in programmes undertaken byseveral Member States. Support goes beyondsimple coordination, to embrace activecontributions to the voluntary integration ofscientic, managerial and nancial aspects.

The ERA-NET scheme provides anotherchannel: promoting cross-border cooperation

and coordination through the networking ofresearch activities conducted at national orregional level.

One more pan-European opportunity for SMEslies in the Eurostars initiative, which is run by theintergovernmental EUREKA organisation andpartly funded by the framework programme.This is designed to stimulate transnational,multi-partner R&D projects initiated and led byresearch-performing SMEs.

Given the recognised need to improveEuropes performance in translating research

ACAdEMICS ARE MORE FAMILIAR WITHEU FUNdING SCHEMES, bUT FOCUS LESS ONExPLOITATION ANd ON THE NEEd FOR SMEPARTICIPATION.

6 / SUPPORTING SME PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES


9/32

results into marketable innovative productsand services, FP7 will also be supportedby the Competitiveness and InnovationProgramme (CIP), which focuses on a rangeof downstream activities and on improvingSME access to alternative sources of nance.

CHANGES bRING MAjORbENEFITS

Nicolas Sabatier, head of the SME Unit atResearch DG, observes that the lessons ofFP6 have led to a number of highly benecialchanges in the allocation of funding and theway that FP7 will be managed.

Of course, nance is the overriding issue forSMEs, he says. Although the target for SMEparticipation remains at 15%, the amount ofmoney available is now much larger thanin the previous programme. Moreover, theintervention rate is raised from 50% to 75%,which will certainly be more attractive forsmall-business applicants.

In addition, exploratory awards thecancellation of which in FP6 caused nancialdifculties for many SMEs will be reinstated.These can be used to offset the cost of

nding partners and preparing a proposal(for SME-specic measures or other fundingmeasures such as Eurostars or ERA-NET) usingexperienced third parties in an exploratoryproject phase of up to 12 months.

Another very important change is that theprinciple of collective nancial responsibilityis replaced by a guarantee fund to coverthe risks of partners failing to complete theirobligations. SMEs will not be obliged to seekexpensive bank guarantees, and a shortage of

nancial resources need not prevent them fromproposing projects or joining their consortia.

There is a new attitude to the implementationof the framework programme at all levels,Sabatier continues. FP administrators areobliged to develop SME policies tuned tothe individual themes. This requires them tomonitor, understand and react to the distinctroles and needs of SMEs in the differingcontexts, building on the ETI actions of FP6.

Greater exibility is built into the applicationof the funding instruments, giving planners thefreedom to adopt ad hoc measures whereneeded to bring SME participation up to thetarget percentage.

And for the SME-specic measures, the

underlying judgement principle has beentotally transformed, with the goal of ensuringthat real value obtained, rather than cost,becomes the main criterion for approving EUinvestment, Sabatier goes on to say.

The whole approach is now more business-model oriented, he concludes. It mirrors theway that SMEs themselves operate. I hopethey will respond by coming forward withproposals that will enable us to move aheadtogether, making solid progress in realising

the Lisbon vision.

WHAT IS AN SME?

A concern voiced by UEAPME, the Euro-pean small-business employers organisa-tion, is that some funding may in the pasthave been misdirected due to ambiguitiesin the denition of what constitutes an SME.

To clarify this issue, a software program(available athttp://ec.europa.eu/research/sme-techweb) will be incorporated into theCommissions central IT system, enablingwould-be applicants to verify their eligibil-ity by completing a simple questionnaire.

FROM FP6 TO FP7 / 7


10/32

The SME Interservice Task Force was set up by the European Commission (EC) to promote and monitor SMEparticipation in the framework programmes (FPs). Its fourth progress report presents statistics for almost allcalls included in FP6. Analysis of available data on project proposals indicates modest growth in the level ofinvolvement over the period, despite still falling short of the EU target. However, special actions taken followingthe rst calls appear to have had a positive effect. Early gures based on actual contract signings suggest an evenmore encouraging end-result.

The fourth progress report (PR4) adds the latestinformation available from the operational

directorates, covering proposals submittedand main-listed following calls with deadlinesup to 22 March 2005. On this basis, successrates were analysed in terms of activityarea, instrument, type of participant andnationality.

ENCOURAGING RESULTS

For the full period under review, the fundingrequested by SMEs in submitted and main-listed proposals is estimated respectivelyat 16.6% and 13.6% of the amount for all

participants. The fact that the proportion formain-listed proposals is 3% lower than forthe totality of submitted proposals indicatesthat SMEs found it more difcult than larger,well-established organisations to achieve therequired standards for selection.

Figures presented in PR4 show a growth of SMEinterest over the second year of FP6. Moreover,it should be noted that the data presented fora substantial number of calls in this publicationdiffer signicantly from those available at the

time of the second and third progress reports.Consequently, the statistical results are also

different from those previously quoted. In thethird report, for example, the overall level of SME

funding requested in main-listed proposals wasestimated at 13%. This has now been reviseddownwards to 12.4%. However, this gure,compared to 15.2% for the second half of FP6,reects the success of measures implemented topromote SME participation in the TPs.

Over the following 15 months, the increase inSME participation was most pronounced forlife sciences, nanotechnologies and materials,food and sustainable surface transport.

A breakdown of participation per funding

instrument in the main-listed proposals coveredby PR4 shows that 58.2% of all SME-requestedsupport related to Integrated Projects (IPs),compared with 30% for Specic TargetedResearch Projects (STREPs) and 4.5% forNetworks of Excellence (NoE). SMEs sought13.4% of the budget for IPs and 16.4% forSTREPs. In fact, STREP was the only instrument,other than Specic Support Actions andCoordination Actions, to exceed the EUs15% target.

These results may be due to a redistributionof funding in line with the recommendations

Chaired by the Research and SMEs unit,the SME Interservice Task Force comprises

representatives from each EC serviceresponsible for the implementation of FP6sthematic priority areas (TPs). Its functions are toset specic participation goals for individualpriorities, undertake detailed analysis ofactual SME involvement, and identify andencourage the take-up of best practices. Thelatest progress report is the fourth in a series,the rst of which examined SME activity inFP5.

Subsequent versions tracked the evolutionof SME participation in the seven TPs of

FP6, for which the overall EU target gurewas 15%. The second report provided anoverview of SME content in the fundingapplications for all proposals submitted andmain-listed (evaluated positively for furthernegotiation) following the rst deadlinesfor calls early in 2003. The third editionupdated the ndings to include data onproposals meeting deadlines before 17December 2003. It also contained a reviewof the measures taken to increase SMEparticipation, and presented action plans

to encourage their further commitment to theTPs in the latter part of the FP.

SME TASK FORCE REPORTS

POSITIvE TRENdS IN FP6

SME Interservice Task ForceProgress Report 4

/ SUPPORTING SME PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES


11/32

of a mid-term evaluation of FP6 conductedby a high-level expert panel under thechairmanship of Professor Ramon Marimon.Its June 2004 report stated that a larger rolemust be played by instruments such as STREPsand small consortium IPs and this must bereected by a substantial increase in the totalshare of the budget nally allocated to STREPsin future calls of FP6.

NEW FIGURES AWAITEd

A general conclusion to be drawn from thepresent data, is that following implementationof special measures (outlined in the articlealongside), most thematic priorities improvedthe share of SMEs in main-listed proposals.

This shows that the actions have had apositive inuence on the quality of proposalsinvolving SMEs.

Collation of the statistics on actual contractswill allow further renement of the estimates.Figures for the Information Society Technologies(IST) thematic priority provide an initialsnapshot view of the work in progress. Onthe basis of contracts following calls before22 March 2005, the funding allocated toSMEs represents 15.9% of the foreseen totalEC contribution substantially higher than

the overall share requested within main-listedproposals. For IST at least, this shows that theproject negotiation phase had the effect ofincreasing SME participation in budgetaryterms. If other priorities follow a similar pattern,a more general uplift will emerge.

SME INTERSERvICE TASK FORCE PROGRESS REPORT /


12/32

In its continued drive to reach and support SMEs, the European Commission has launched a number of policiesdesigned exclusively to benet SME participation in European activities. Aimed at facilitating greater access toinformation, minimising the legislative requirements, raising SME awareness and their greater inclusion in researchin particular, these policies are having direct and important results. In a gearing-up of priorities, the Commissioncreated the think small rst initiative to encourage SME innovation and networking, and in part, to help shapetheir entrepreneurial culture.

This commitment to support the needs of smallbusinesses from nance through to research,

business and innovation, is especially evidentthrough the proactive strategies taken by theCommissions Health directorate during the6th Framework Programme (FP6).

During FP6, the Commissions focus lay heavilyon genomics, overlooking several other sectorsin which biotechnology was highly active. Ananalysis of FP6 also revealed that many SMEsremained unaware of funding opportunities,or were discouraged by funding procedures.Additionally, they preferred projects that weresmaller in scope but broader in topic.

Armed with this understanding, the directoratein charge of Health, undertook a number ofstrategies that have proved to be successfulnot only in generating the interest of SMEs,but also in reaping the rewards of theirparticipation.

Firstly, they increased the number of calls whichhad more pertinent SME orientated topics.They also increased SME support, as withsuch endeavors as the SMEsgoLifeScience

project, which aimed specically to raisethe quality and quantity of SME involvement

in FP6. Finally, they also took measures toincrease awareness and visibility. The overall

result was that they achieved the 15% target forSME participation in the third call comparedto previous results.

It was believed that this achievement, whileimpressive as such, could be improved upon.The Health directorate did just that, in one ofthe better known success stories for initiativescatering to SMEs.

The strategy gave rise to the SME SpecicTargeted Research Projects (SME-STREPs).Working closely with enterprises highly familiar

with biomedical SMEs, such as EuropaBio,SMEsgoLifeScience, National Contact Pointsand Emerging Biopharmaceutical Enterprises,the directorate developed a call specic toSME interests, whose results far exceeded theCommissions expectations.

The requirements for SME-STREPs were simple:calls had to be SME driven, designed to supportSME research and innovation, have resultsthat were of interest or benecial for SMEs inparticular, and the leading roles were expected

to be played by SMEs. SME partners would begiven 30% to 50% of the funding.

The results in this change of objectives werestaggering. The SME-STREP initiative received

more than 365 proposals, of which 86 willreceive funding totalling more than EUR 200million. Of this funding, 43% is slated for SMEpartners. More than 250 SMEs are involved-- many are rst-time participants.

While these are still primarily in the negotiationphase, examples of SME-driven projectsinclude: Innovative Diagnostic Approachesfor Biomarkers in Parkinson Disease; FullyAutomated and Integrated MicrouidicPlatform for Real-time Molecular Diagnosis ofMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus;

and Development of Multi-Step ImprovedEpidermic-Specic Vaccine CandidateAgainst HIV1/AIDS. All of these projects haveSMEs as coordinators and EC funding ofseveral million euros.

IN FOCUS: Health sector

THE REAL dEAL:

HEALTHy REFORMSFOR SERIOUS SMEs



13/32

These, among numerous others, are beingheralded as a major success for the projectsinitiative, and in part, its success is attributableto the changes the EC has itself made.Because SMEs are fast moving but complexentities, the ECs approach has been bothexible and practical.

In its follow-up role, the EC has changed a

number of items in its performance requirementsto best include these factors. It has opted fora proactive stance, providing rapid responsesto change either within the consortia or theresearch strategies. It strives to anticipate SMEneeds and provide such needs with whateverassistance it can, such as intellectual propertyrights (IPR) issues through its IPR-Helpdesk,improving communication strategies, andnally, learning from its FP6 experience toimprove its FP7 structure.

Whilst it is still in its early stages, the

phenomenal success gained so far ishighly indicative of the positive changes thedirectorate in charge of Health has made,and the eagerness of SMEs in rising to thechallenges of this response-driven initiative. Itis, by and large, a suitable herald in its ownright, a sterling example for others, that ifgiven the chance, SMEs may prove every bitas dynamic, vibrant and results-driven as theirlarger corporate competitors. Perhaps, evenmore so.

HEALTH SECTOR / 11


14/32

The rst Competitiveness and InnovationFramework Programme (CIP) is a coherent andintegrated response to the objectives of thereinvigorated Lisbon growth and jobs strategy.CIP helps enterprises grow and innovate by:

supporting private equity and loanguarantee schemes;providing SMEs with clear and efcientinformation and advice via the business

support networks, building on todaysEuro Info Centres (EICs) and InnovationRelay Centres (IRCs);improving the conditions for innovation bysupporting exchanges of best practices,networking and analysis, with particularemphasis on eco-innovation;stimulating the new converging marketsfor electronic networks, media contentand digital technologies;encouraging the wider uptake of newand renewable energies and promotingenergy efciency.

The CIP and Seventh Framework Programme(FP7) are complementary, and both run from2007 to 2013.

SUPPORTINGCOMPETITIvENESS ANdINNOvATION CAPACITy

Europe needs to improve on its ability tobring research and ideas to market. This is aparticular challenge for small to medium-sized

enterprises (SMEs), which make up 99% ofEuropean businesses.

By specically targeting SMEs, CIP aimsto support actions to reduce the obstaclesto innovation and growth, and to boostentrepreneurship and productivity. CIPbrings elements of nine existing and provenprogrammes together in a single coherentframework, focused on the overarchingobjectives of competitiveness and innovation.

New instruments and actions have also beenintroduced. CIP comprises three specicprogrammes: the Entrepreneurship andInnovation Programme (EIP); the ICT PolicySupport Programme (ICTP); and the IntelligentEnergy Europe Programme (IEEP). These threeprogrammes respectively receive a 60:20:20share of the total CIP budget of EUR 3.6billion. Although this budget is signicantlysmaller than that of FP7 and cohesion funding,by acting closer to the market CIP will have asignicant leverage ef fect.

IMPROvING ACCESS TOFINANCE

Through EIP, more than EUR 1 billion willdirectly boost the provision of suitablenance for the start-up and growth of SMEs.Entrepreneurs face a number of hurdles whenit comes to securing nancing, whether it beventure capital or a loan for expansion. Themarket perceives new and edgling SMEs,particularly innovative ones, as high-riskinvestments. CIP leverages private capital to

where there are market failures, both in theavailability of risk capital for enterprises with

high growth potential, and of loan nance fortraditional small enterprises. For example:

The High Growth and Innovative SMEFacility (GIF) increases the supply ofequity for innovative SMEs both in theirearly stages of development (GIF 1) andin the expansion phase (GIF 2). GIF co-invests in equity funds and shares the risks

and rewards with private equity investors,providing important leverage for thesupply of equity to innovative companies.

The SME Guarantee Facility reinforces thecapacity of national and regional banksto supply debt nance (such as loans,leasing or micro-credit) to SMEs. Equityguarantees are also supported.

The Capacity Building Scheme helpsbroaden the scope of nancial providersin some Member States by enhancing

the investment and technology know-howof funds and other nancial institutionsinvesting in innovative SMEs or SMEswith growth potential. It also stimulates thesupply of credit to SMEs by improving thecredit evaluation process for lending.

Furthermore, a new instrument will belaunched for the securitisation of banks SMEloan portfolios, enabling them to free upfurther lending capacity.

1.

2.

3.

CIP:

HELPING EUROPEAN SMEsINNOvATE ANd GROW

Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP)



15/32

Community Financial Instruments under CIP arecoordinated by the European Investment Fund(EIF) and delivered through existing banks,nancial institutions and equity funds in theparticipating countries. Therefore, individualenterprises should not address requests forsupport to the European Commission or EIFdirectly.

CIP provides SMEs with a local access pointfor information and advice on Europeanprogrammes (especially FP7), single marketissues, European regulations and innovationactions. CIP brings together the servicescurrently provided by the EIC and IRC networksinto a single unit for services in support ofbusiness and innovation. These are hostedby organisations that are already providingsimilar services for SMEs in their regions.

GRANT SCHEMES

CIP provides more traditional grant supportto SMEs, although the funding involved isof a smaller scale than research or cohesionfunding. Calls for proposals or calls for tenderswill be launched on a periodic basis in thecontext of the following instruments (amongothers).

Europe Innova facilitates the networkingof innovation professionals from varioussectors and elds to provide a test-bed forimproved innovation support mechanismsand tools in the eld of cluster management,innovation nancing, and managingdevelopment, as well as to discuss, testand exchange good practice, ideas,tools and policy recommendations.

More information on Europe Innova isavailable at:

www.europe-innova.org/index.jsp

Eco-innovation actions will include supportfor pilot and market replication projectsand for eco-innovation networks. Theimplementation of these actions will startin 2008.

e-TEN provides a bridge betweenresearch investment and wide adoption,by providing a testing ground for pan-European electronic services in both the

public and private sectors.

More information on e-TEN is available at:www.ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/eten/index_en.htm

e-Content supports the production anddistribution of European digital content.It tackles the fragmentation of the

European digital content market andimproves the accessibility and usability ofgeographical information, cultural contentand educational material.

More information on e-Content is availableat:www.cordis.europa.eu/econtent

CIP covers the Member States of the EuropeanUnion. Subject to bilateral agreements, it islikely to be opened to the members of theEuropean Economic Area, and candidate

countries. Participation of other ThirdCountries, especially Western Balkan,European Neighbourhood or MED Partnercountries, may also be negotiated.

To facilitate SME access to the CIP instruments,the CIP User Manual centralises informationon how to apply for support. Furthermore,many of the activities are coordinated by asingle executive agency. For more informationon CIP, visitwww.ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_

policy/cip/index_en.htm

More information on EIF is available at:www.eif.eu.int

More information on EIC is available at:www.ec.europa.eu/enterprise/networks/eic/eic.html

More information on IRC is available at:www.innovationrelay.net

COMPETITIvENESS ANd INNOvATION FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME (CIP) / 13


16/32

Nanotechnology is a eld of applied scienceand technology which cuts across manydisciplines, including colloidal science,chemistry, applied physics, materials

science, and even mechanical and electricalengineering. Essentially, it is about making,manipulating and measuring extremely tinythings. Things so small that they are measuredin nanometres.

It is not an industry or a market in the samesense as biotechnology, for example, butan enabling technology whose importancechiey lies in the impact that it will have onestablished industries and markets.

Nanotechnology represents the prospect

of using existing materials and putting themtogether in new ways to make new things. Itis inevitable that nanotechnology will have abroad and fundamental impact on many sectorsof Europes economy. The applications ofnanotechnology are extremely diverse, mainlybecause the eld is interdisciplinary. In addition,the effect that nanotechnology will haveduring the next decade is difcult to estimatebecause of potentially new and unanticipatedapplications. For example, if simply reducing themicrostructure in existing materials can make a

big market impact, then this may, in turn, lead toa whole new set of applications.

During the next two to three years most activityin nanotechnology will still be in the area ofresearch. It is attracting rapidly increasinginvestments from governments and businesses.

It is currently an area of research focus inmost developed countries, many of whichare launching nanotechnology initiatives inorder to strengthen their capacity and sustaineconomic growth.

EARLy NANOTECHINvESTMENT

Europe has invested early in nanosciences andnanotechnologies (N&N) R&D and has madevaluable progress over the last few years.Between 2002 and 2006, the EU spent

EUR 1.3 billion on nanotechnology fundingas part of its Sixth Framework Programme.In terms of absolute public expenditure, thesignicant nancial resources that the EU isinvesting compare favourably with the UnitedStates and Japan. The total investment innanotechnology research and developmentin Europe is EUR 1.9 billion, not far short ofthe US (EUR 2.7 billion) and Japan (EUR 2.1billion).

Europe should also be able to capitalise

upon its knowledge by transforming researchand development into actual applications

and products, and thus into wealth andemployment. Europes strength in nanosciencesis demonstrated by the sheer volume ofnanotechnology publications it supports

and the number of nanotechnology patentsit holds. Europe has recognised strengths inspecic areas of nanotechnology research in nanomaterials and nanoelectronics,photovoltaics and nano-based sensors andin a more general sense, regenerative medicineand targeted drug delivery. Europe also has astrong industrial base in instrumentation.

TEACHING SMESCOMMERCIAL COMMONSENSE

Against such a background, the 30-monthnanoMAT project ran training and commercialawareness workshops for selected SMEsworking with nanotechnologies andnanomaterials so they could become moreinnovative and involved in the EUs RTDprogrammes.

Policymakers, university departments, andprofessional organisations recognise the value and also the complexity of mergingdisciplines in order to exploit nanotechnology.

Investment and patience are needed tocultivate a new way of thinking, and this

Nanotechnology is one of the key technologies of the 21st century. Its range of applications ranges from opticsand analysis, via the environment and medicine, to transport and communications. The nanoMAT project rantraining and commercial awareness workshops for selected SMEs so they could become more innovative in theway they brought their expertise and solutions to market.

Case study

PROJECT NAME: NANOMAT

NANOTECHNOLOGy:

SMALL SCIENCE STRIKESbIG dEALS



17/32

is one of the most important challengesfor nanotechnology: getting people fromdifferent disciplines to learn to solve problemstogether.

This is also where the nanoMAT projectcame into its own. Composed of technologytransfer intermediary organisations, nationalinnovation agencies, universities and private

consulting companies from 10 EU newMember States and candidate countries, theconsortium provided SMEs with access totechnical and commercial expertise.

This allowed the consortiums western Europeanpartners, with considerable experience in EURTD programmes, to transfer their experienceto their colleagues in eastern Europe. Theknowledge transfer was also reciprocal,with the eastern European countries helpingtheir western counterparts to learn about theexpertise and opportunities available outside

their usual sphere of operation.

As nanoMAT progressed, consortium membersin the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland,Romania and Slovakia delivered 10 trainingsessions to 259 SMEs, and helped 228 SMEsprepare and submit 39 RTD project proposalsto FP6. Customised technology-watch servicestaught 75 SMEs how to bring their expertiseand solutions to market.

SHARING OUT NANOTECHKNOW-HOW bETWEEN SMEs

The sessions offered SMEs expert insightinto how their emerging technologieswould impact markets. New technologyis one of the primary drivers of competitiveadvantage. However, it can also threaten

and disrupt established markets. By sharingtheir understanding of the potential impact ofnanotech, the consortium members helped theSMEs prepare for whatever might be aroundthe corner.

In terms of general support activities, thenanoMAT consortium also performed109 technology audits and disseminatedinformation on nanoMAT project servicesand EU RTD opportunities to more than500 European SMEs. Eight national andone European state-ofthe-art reports on

nanotechnologies and nanomaterials wereproduced and seven nanoMAT good practicedocuments were published. The EuropeanState of the Art of Nanotechnology FinalReport is available atwww.innova-europe.lu/nanomat

nanoMAT was co-nanced under theEconomic and Technological Intelligence(ETI) scheme within FP6s Research andInnovation programme.

OFFICIAL TITLENANOMAT a targeted action to

encourage the participation of SMEsin FP6, in the nanotechnologies and

nanomaterials elds

COORdINATORInnova Europe Sarl (Luxembourg)

PARTNERSSteinbeis Europa Zentrum (Germany)

EUROQUALITY (France)BIC Bratislava Ltd (Slovakia)Puskas Tivadar Alipitvany Institute ofInternational Technology (Hungary)Politechnika Wroclawska Centre forTechnology Transfer (Poland)Inova Pro, sro (Czech Republic)Politehnica University of Bucharest Centrefor Advanced Technologies (Romania)Fundacin para el ConocimientoMadrimasd (Spain)SENTER/EG-Liaison (the Netherlands)

FURTHER INFORMATIONPaula Galvo

email: [email protected]

tel: +352 269 23755www.innova-europe.lu/nanomat

PROjECT COST1 116 710

EU FUNdING911 321

PROjECT REFERENCEContract No CT-2004-508695

NANOMAT / 1


18/32

Distributed Generation (DG) involvesproducing or storing energy, especiallyelectricity, at or near its point ofconsumption. This Distributed Energy

Resources (DER) concept allowsconsumers, who generate heat orelectricity for their own needs, to sendsurplus electrical power back into thepower grid a process known as netmetering or share excess heat via adistributed heating system.

Traditionally, electricity has beenproduced in a relatively small number oflarge power stations and transmitted overlong distances via transmission systems,eventually being distributed to customers

via local distribution networks.

Distributed generation systems usingCombined Heat and Power (CHP) canbe much more efcient, using up to 90%of the potential energy in the fuel theyconsume. CHP can also save a lot ofmoney and fuel. DG could thereforeprovide utilities with an alternative tobuilding new centralised power plantsor having to rely on outdated, inefcientplants.

The growing DER market can also improve airquality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions ifclean and efcient technologies are used. DGtypically provides reliable electric power and

allows businesses to save on electricity costsby using their DG units during high-demand,peak periods when power may be at its mostexpensive, or even in scarce supply.

dEvELOPING NEW ENERGyTECHNOLOGIES

In the next few years, the European marketfor distributed generation is expected to growrapidly, as both electricity users and supplierstake increasing advantage of this newconcept for supplying electric power. DERs

therefore present SMEs with a whole range ofopportunities for them to develop technologiesfor power generation and energy distribution.

The Synergy project has been helping SMEs tomake the most of the new opportunities opento them in this new energy sector. Designedto increase the participation of DER SMEs inprojects of the Sixth Framework Programme(FP6) the EUs main programme forresearch in Europe SYNERGY has helpedthe managers of these SMEs improve their

capacity to foresee the future and thereforemake better strategic decisions.

The projects main objective has been tobuild up the very competitive knowledge thatmanagers will need if they are to competeeffectively in their chosen line of business

and market sector. This has meant providingthem with not just technological information,but also economic, legal, social and politicalknow-how.

POOLING PAN-EUROPEANKNOWLEdGE

Combining resources from a range of technicaland management elds in Europe, SYNERGYwas led by LABEIN-Tecnalia, a technologyresearch centre in the Basque region ofSpain, with six other partners in Spain,

France, Germany, Austria and Finland. Theproject offered SMEs face-to-face audits withexperienced consultants so they might identifypotential technology needs in the EuropeanDER sector. It also presented a range ofnetworking opportunities with large energycompanies and independent energy experts.

One of SYNERGYs outcomes has been thecreation of knowledge pills, easily-assimilatedpieces of information intended to supportSMEs in their strategic planning and decision

making. Just as a conventional pill has theeffect of making a person feel better, so SME

Distributed Generation is a new trend in the creation of heat and electrical power. It has the potential to play animportant role in a future sustainable energy system in Europe. The SYNERGY project has gathered technologyand management expertise from all over Europe, so that SMEs can understand the range of opportunitiesbecoming available in this new market and win new funding for research and development.

Case study

PROJECT NAME: SYNERGY

GENERATING ENERGy

KNOW-HOW FOREUROPEAN SMEs



19/32

managers have become capable of dealingwith future challenges by using knowledge toacquire vision, and so be better equipped toidentify new business oppor tunities in the DERsector.

Perhaps most importantly, SYNERGY hashelped SMEs to either prepare proposalsfor new FP6 projects, or follow requests from

consortium members to join other projectproposals. A total of 82 SMEs (57 from theSYNERGY project itself) submitted 15 newproposals to previous Energy calls. Half theproposals were successful (60% of thesebeing SYNERGY SMEs), thanks to the highlevel of expertise contained within the project.There are 31 SMEs that have already startedtheir desired research and development innew FP6 projects.

ACHIEvING RESULTS ANdLEARNING FOR THE FUTURE

Just over 100 Energy SMEs were audited andtheir proles placed on to a database, readyto be integrated into new European researchand innovation proposals. Out of these,20 have already become engaged in newproposals. A total of 220 delegates attended8 dissemination seminars in Austria, Finland,France, Germany and Spain.

However, a number of lessons have beenlearned during the project. Businesses need to

network with other European companies more,to cross-fertilise ideas. More sophisticated

marketing and a higher quality of knowledgedissemination are also required if SMEs areto be convinced about the usefulness andnecessity of having competitive knowledgeunder their belt. They have to see how thisknowledge can benet their own businessand lead directly to submitting successfulproposals.

The European Technology Platforms mayprovide a good opportunity for SYNERGY tobecome the voice of the SMEs. This is perhapswhere SYNERGYs successor, SYNERGY+,which is coordinated by TECHNOFI, couldmake its mark. Approved in the last 2005ETI call, SYNERGY+ will continue to offersupport services to European SMEs. In therst FP7 calls for proposals dealing with DER,National or Regional Energy Agencies havealso joined members of the consortium.

For more information on the SYNERGY

(Strengthening the Competitive Intelligenceof the European Distributed Energy ResourcesSector) project, visit the website atwww.sme-innova.com/synergy

SYNERGY was co-nanced under theEconomic and Technological Intelligence(ETI) scheme within FP6s Research andInnovation programme.

OFFICIAL TITLE

SYNERGY strengthening thecompetitive intelligence of the European

distributed energy resources sector

COORdINATORFundacin Labein (Spain)

PARTNERSCluster de Energia (Spain)Institut fr Solare

Energieversorgungstechnik Verein an derUniversitat Kassel EV (Germany)sterreichisches Forschungs-undPrfzentrum Arsenal GmbH (Austria)Technical Research Centre of Finland(Finland)TECHNOFI (France)Oy Merinova Ab (Finland)

FURTHER INFORMATIONCarlos Pea

email: [email protected]: +34 9460 73300

www.sme-innova.com/synergy

PROjECT COST

1 447 780

EU FUNdING933 818


SyNERGy / 17


20/32

Food quality and safety has great potential for innovation, and recent scientic progress has created manyopportunities for new technology. Drawing together expertise from all over Europe, the SMEsforFOOD consortiumhas not only helped SMEs advertise their wares, but has also acted as a practical matchmaking tool, helping smallcompanies and research institutes nd suitable partners for their future projects within FP7.

SMEs strengthen their ability to innovate byidentifying their needs and anticipating markettrends.

Right from the start, SMEs were able toadvertise their wares to potential fundingorganisations, because the project developeda common database containing SMEscompetencies and project ideas from all overEurope (this database can be accessed via theSMEsforFOOD website at www.smesforfood.org). Around 440 high quality SME prolesare now available on the site.

Many of these SMEs are mainly active infood production (39%), but the database alsocovers other related areas such as agriculture

and aquaculture, analysis and detection,biotechnology, food technology, and foodequipment and services (each representingabout 10% of the SME proles). Most of theSMEs are very small companies (77% havefewer than 50 employees and 40% fewerthan 10 employees).

The number of projects identied, proled andpublished on the SMEsforFOOD database hasbeen growing steadily: from six projects proledin the rst call for proposals (which were mainly

ongoing projects, since the call was launchedbefore SMEsforFOOD was started), to 38

projects proled for the last call.

One of the key activities undertaken bySMEsforFOOD was to identify SMEs that

were both willing and able to participatein European research and developmentpartnerships within FP6 Food Quality andSafety calls for proposals. Over 9 000 SMEswere contacted with details of the projectsinitiatives and services. SMEs were invited toattend 117 workshops where they would beprovided with information on FP6.

CHOOSING COLLAbORATORS

SMEsforFOODs 19 partners, private andpublic organisations working across 16

countries, also wanted to meet actual (andinuence potential) project leaders and presentthe SMEsforFOOD initiative at the same time,highlighting the importance of having SMEpartners in European projects.

Through mail-outs, specic workshops,and general networking with researchinstitutes, universities and technical centres,SMEsforFOOD identied 77 projects, whichwere then brought to the attention of potentialindustrial partners. Most of these (47) were

Integrated Projects (IPs) and 12 wereNetworks of Excellence (NoEs).

The food available in Europe has never beensafer, healthier, or of such good quality. Hugeleaps in science have given us the technologyto differentiate between the good, the bad

and the inedible. High-tech quality controltools have supplemented stringent Europeanand national legislation to help ensure thatonly the best reaches our plates.

Europeans can tap into vast bodies ofnutritional research to help them choose thehealthiest mix of foods. Food quality andsafety has grown into a signicant sectorfor European research. As the fth thematicpriority (Priority 5) under the 6th FrameworkProgramme (FP6), it has also been a greatsuccess. With a budget approaching EUR

800 million, Priority 5 aimed to clarify thelinks between food and health. It supportedresearch to help develop an environmentallyfriendly production and distribution chain ableto deliver safer, healthier and more variedfood to European citizens.

OPENING SMES, UP TO NEWOPPORTUNITIES

The three-year SMEsforFOOD project made up of a consortium led by OSEO

anvar (formerly ANVAR, the French Agencyfor Innovation) has helped European

Case study

PROJECT NAME: SMEsforFOOD

SMEs dEvELOP AN

APPETITE FORbUSINESS



21/32

HLP Developpement(France)Association de Coordi-nation Technique pourlIndustrie Agroalimen-taire (France)Institut Nationalde la RechercheAgronomique (France)FFG AustrianResearch PromotionAgency (Austria)Euresearch/SchweizerNetzwerk fr Innova-tion Rseau SuissedInnovation SNI-RSI(Switzerland)Gabinete de Relaes

Internacionais daCincia e do EnsinoSuperior (Portugal)SENTER(the Netherlands)Scientic and Techni-cal Research Councilof Turkey (Turkey)Fundacin AZTI AZTIFundazioa (Spain)ISERD MATIMOP (Israel)Institut Nationalde la RechercheAgronomique - Tou-louse (France)The Brussels EnterpriseAgency (Belgium)Agenzia per laPromozione dellaRicerca Europea(Italy)

RTD TALOS LTD(Cyprus)Food Industrial Researchand Technological De-velopment Company SADanish AgriculturalCouncil (Denmark)Hungarian Scienceand Technology Foun-dation (Hungary)Institute of FundamentalTechnological Re-search, Polish Academyof Sciences (Poland)Technology Centreof the Academy ofSciences CR (CzechRepublic)

FURTHERINFORMATION

Michel Ganooteemail: smesforfood@

oseo.frtel: +33 (0)1 41 79 91 35www.smesforfood.org


EU FUNdING1 227 150


OFFICIAL TITLESMESforFOOD Specic Support Action to

improve the participation of SMEs in IntegratedProjects and Networks of Excellence in the food

quality and safety sector

COORdINATOROSEO anvar formerly ANVAR,

the French agency for Innovation (France)

PARTNERS

Although SMEsforFOOD focused from thebeginning on IPs and NoEs, it adapted its scopeof activity for the last Food Quality and Safetycall to include smaller projects, Specic TargetedResearch Projects (STREPs). Consequently, theproject proled 11 STREPs from this last call.

The focus of SMEsforFOOD then moved to

helping SMEs and project leaders in theirsearch for partners, helping them to matchtheir respective skills, needs and expectationsto create an effective research anddevelopment partnership for an FP6 proposal.SMEsforFOOD organised a brokerage eventin Lille, France, where 33 SMEs and 21 projectleaders across Europe were able to discussfuture research and development partnershipsvia 120 pre-organised, face-to-face meetings.The SMEsforFOOD database came into itsown as a matchmaking tool for the event. Asa result, 207 SMEs were included in IP, NoE

and STREP proposals submitted to FP6 FoodQuality and Safety calls.

SMEsforFOOD made a particular impacton the number of SMEs that took part in IPproposals: 162 in all. The number of SMEsinvolved in such projects has in fact beengrowing from the rst to the third Food Qualityand Safety call. In the fourth and last call,SMEsforFOOD also worked on smallerprojects, helping 32 SMEs participate inSTREP proposals.

A HEALTHy FUTURE

In the last transition year of the project, theactivities planned within SMEsforFOOD wererefocused to address the end of FP6 and toprepare SMEs for their involvement in FP7.During its life, SMEsforFOOD has proven tobe an excellent networking tool, providing

strong support for Food Quality and SafetySMEs and project leaders.

The consortium has therefore decided tokeep the projects database up and runningin its role as a practical matchmaking tool tohelp small companies and research institutescontinue to nd suitable partners for theirfuture projects within FP7 Food, Agricultureand Fisheries, and Biotechnology calls forproposals. This will be promoted throughthe new FP7 National Contact Point systemand its transnational networking activities, in

particular.

SMEsforFOOD was co-nanced under theEconomic and Technological Intelligence(ETI) scheme within FP6s Research andInnovation programme.

SMEsforFOOd / 1


22/32

A signicant number of rural SMEs qualify for membership of EU-supported research projects, just as much astheir urban counterparts. Historically, however, their uptake of these opportunities has been very low. The Rural-ETINET projects 12-member consortium drawn from 11 different countries has helped to rectify this by creatinga pan-European support network for rural SMEs, complemented by workshops and a skills database to facilitateparticipation and improve access to knowledge.

how to approach the challenge. The aim of thisproject has been to help SMEs develop, andprovide them with an opportunity to benet

from European research, particularly fromFP6, the EUs main programme for research inEurope that ran from 2002 to 2006. Specialfocus was placed on SMEs and a target of15% of the total budget of EUR 17.5 billionwas dedicated to their participation.

Rural-ETINET helped rural businesses nd theirplace in FP6 by providing informational supportwith newsletters, condential consultationsand guidance with EU documents. It alsohelped network rural business communitiesacross Europe to maximise innovation and

entrepreneurship, thereby improving theeconomy of rural areas.

The project set up 5 sub-networks, with aminimum of 25 organisations in each, whichaddressed the areas of novel crops, on-farmfood processing, forestry and the woodchain, waste management, and ecosystems.By adopting a themed approach focusingon three of the FP6 Thematic Priorities namely TP5 (Food Quality and Safety), TP6(Sustainable Development, Global Change

and Ecosystems, and TP8 (Research forPolicy Support) the project addressed the

requirements of the majority of rural SMEs.

CONSORTIUM ExPERTISE

The projects 12 partners were drawn from 11countries from across Europe, organisationsor private companies with a wealth ofexperience in EU research and developmentand technology cooperation. Rural-ETINETestablished a network of 534 members, ofwhich 264 (or 49%) were rural SMEs. Thiswas well above the projects initial target of25%.

A best practice document was produced bythe projects coordinator, Beta Technology,

following a detailed consultation exercisecarried out in Reykjavik, Iceland, at thepenultimate consortium meeting. The nalversion of the document includes case studyexamples from four Rural-ETINET partnercountries, offering guidance on how to setup and maintain an SME network, and howto participate in the framework programme.For a copy of this document, visit the Betatechnology website at www.betatechnology.co.uk.

The projects workshops and networkingevents addressed a range of topics in the

The rural-based small and medium-sizedenterprise (SME) sector has not traditionallybeen associated with enterprise and innovative

business. This is easily explained by image. Ifyou take the historical view of rural business asa one-person operation focused around whatnow appear to be disappearing skills, thereis the perception that SMEs are struggling tostand on rm ground. But taking a broaderview to include all the types of businessesyou nd in rural communities, leads to a verydifferent picture.

Rural SMEs make a healthy contributionto the European economy, yet they tend tolack the market prole of their urban peers,

who are closer and better connected to therelevant support organisations. Many ruralSMEs qualify for membership of EU-supportedresearch projects just as much as their urbanequivalents, but few in the past have takenadvantage of support schemes.

HELPING SMES GAIN ACCESSTO EU KNOW-HOW

There has always been an awareness of theplight of businesses in rural areas and the

need for them not to be disadvantaged. It wasnecessary, however, to become smarter about

Case study

PROJECT NAME: Rural-ETINET

NETWORKING RURAL SMEs

TO bUILd KNOWLEdGE ANdWIN bUSINESS



23/32

OFFICIAL TITLERural-ETINET Economic and

Technological Intelligence projectto facilitate SMEs in rural areas toparticipate in the Six th Framework

Programme

COORdINATORBeta Technology (United Kingdom)

PARTNERS

FFG Austrian Research Promotion Agency(Austria)Agezia Per La Promozione Della RicercaEuropea (Italy)Swedish EU/R&D Council integrated intothe Swedish Agency for Innovation SystemsVINNOVA during the reporting period(Sweden)The Scientic and Technical ResearchCouncil of Turkey (Turkey)University of National and World Economy(Bulgaria)RTD Talos (Cyprus)Foundation for Research and TechnologyHellas (Greece)Food Industrial Research and Technological

Development Company SA (Greece)Rannsoknamidstod Islands (Iceland)Institute of Landscape Ecology of the SlovakAcademy of Sciences (Slovakia)FM Management Consulting FMMC (Romania)

FURTHER INFORMATIONAntony Davies

Beta Technologyemail: [email protected]

tel: +44 1302 322 633www.rural-sme.net


EU FUNdING979 453


rural/environmental areas of FP6 and FP7.The target audience was SMEs, researchersand intermediaries. The events weredesigned to be practical and informative,striking a balance between the needs of theexperienced and the less knowledgeableaudience members. Presentations on FP6/7were given by a number of experienced Rural-ETINET consortium members. This was then

followed by brokerage activities, wherebyorganisations or individuals looking to eitherattract partners to a project, or advertise theirskills and expertise, could meet and interact.Networking was encouraged at each event.

bUILdING RELATIONSHIPS

Consortium meetings were an essentialcomponent of the project management workpackage. The meetings served to allow allconsortium partners to communicate face-to-face and to build effective working relationships.

Beta Technology coordinated and chaired allof the consortium meetings, and partners wereencouraged to ask questions and give theiropinions on the progress of the project.

The project also created an open database,so that researchers and project managersrequiring rural SME expertise could easilynd potential partners. SMEs contactedcould also call upon the project team for freeadvice on complex issues, such as intellectualproperty rights and the nancial implications

of joining an ongoing or proposed consortium areas where SMEs lack knowledge and

experience.

For more information on the Rural-ETINET(Economic and Technological IntelligenceProject to Facilitate SMEs in Rural Areas toParticipate in the Sixth Framework Programme)project, visit the website atwww.rural-sme.net

Rural-ETINET was co-nanced under theEconomic and Technological Intelligence(ETI) scheme within FP6s Research andInnovation programme.

RURAL-ETINET / 21


24/32

Innovative SMEs are seen as key drivers of European competitiveness. Directing public support towards thosethat have the strongest innate growth potential is a strategy that brings demonstrable promise of a high return oninvestment, in both economic and job-creation terms. But there are signicant difculties in identifying the mostdeserving candidates and structuring the support, so that it applies to their real needs. HiGroSME took up thischallenge and reached some unexpected conclusions.

GAPS IdENTIFIEd

Even before the ofcial start of the project in

December 2004, TAFTIE had established aspecial taskforce to analyse the needs of SMEsand the adequacy of available support schemes.

It concluded that there was no Europe-wide programme dedicated to high-growth-potential SMEs (HGSMEs), and that theprogrammes at national and regional levelswere limited in their scope, due to factors suchas a narrow technology focus or constraints onaccommodating cross-border collaborations.The latter is particularly crippling for SMEsin smaller countries, where the availability of

local technology partners is restricted.

By contrast, the actual support needs ofHGSMEs extend from early-stage basicresearch, through product development(often requiring ten or more times the initialinvestment), to market launch and rapidmarket expansion beyond national andEuropean frontiers. Moreover, much of thishelp is required at a time when the companyis unable to generate commercial revenues.

Today, even when assistance can be obtained,it frequently has to be sought from different

programmes; it is sometimes operated bydifferent agencies, and sometimes at differentlevels of government. The result is multipleapplications, duplicated due diligence, and

inevitable delays.

AMbITIOUS GOALS

Thus, HiGroSME had the following three-foldobjectives:

creating a European support network,specically geared to promoting thetechnological and business developmentof HGSMEs;nding ways to optimise existing nationaland European support programmes;preparing for the creation of a new

European initiative to close the criticalgaps in and between programmes.

The initial tasks were to establish the criteriaidentifying the HGSME candidates suitablefor support, and to reach consensus on whichcategories of resource the agencies shouldprovide.

Discussion of these issues with nationalpolicymakers and other stakeholders tookplace in a series of national workshops,

culminating in the European conferenceSupporting High-Growth Potential Firms:

The development of strong and innovativeSMEs is central to the industrial andemployment policies of the European Union

and its individual Member States. However,the bulk of EU SMEs continue to suffer from alack of investment resources during the criticalstages of their development.

The most obvious barrier is the access to, andcost of, external nancial support. Because ofthe difculties in obtaining longer-term venturecapital or equity par ticipation, most SMEs areobliged to rely on self-nancing by internallygenerated funding or bank borrowings.

Even when supplemented by the existing

Europe-wide and national programmes, thisapproach is clearly failing to meet currentneeds. Further action is urgently needed, inorder to reach Europes Lisbon and Barcelonatargets for growth and jobs in a knowledge-based society.

A group of eight national technologyand innovation programme agencies, allmembers of The Association for TechnologyImplementation in Europe (TAFTIE), joinedforces in the Specic Support Action

HiGroSME, with a view to dening andimplementing a suitable strategy.

Case study

PROJECT NAME: HiGroSME

WHAT MAKES A

HIGH-GROWTHWINNER?



25/32


26/32

The European foundry sector consists largely of SMEs, most of which are not particularly research-oriented. Toremain competitive in the global economy, they share a common need to adopt new cost-saving methods, whileconforming to increasing environmental legislation. The Specic Support Action (SSA) ECO-in-Foundries hasestablished a dedicated service offering up-to -date advice on sustainable practices, encouraging networkingbetween businesses, and providing links to potential resources and partners.

environment-friendly, low-waste methods.

MAKING INFORMATION

ACCESSIbLEThe EU itself has funded a number of projectswithin its successive Research TechnologicalDevelopment (RTD) Framework Programmes(FP) to address such challenges. The results ofthese and other efforts at national and regionallevels offer a wealth of valuable know-how tothose who know where to look.

The FP6 initiative ECO-in-Foundry sought tofacilitate this process by bringing together theEuropean foundries experiences in sustainable

processing, and disseminating this informationthroughout the industry as a whole.

Principal goals of the two-year SSA wereto promote communication between SMEs,research organisations, associations andtechnology developers in different countries todevelop problem-solving tools and to identifytopics demanding further research.

An eight-nation consortium, coordinated byItalys Unione Regionale delle Camere di

Commercio del Veneto (the Veneto Chamberof Commerce), brought together a mix of SME

foundries, industry associations and researchinstitutes, together with environmental andsoftware consultancies.

TWO-STAGE APPROACH

Work began with an extensive study of existingenvironmental technology across Europe, todetermine the state of the art and identify themost promising problem-solving options.

A report has subsequently been publishedwhich provides statistics on the sector andsummarises the results of the on-site analysescarried out in six countries to review foundryprocesses and the related environmental

issues.

In the second year of the project, the partnersembarked on the tool development phase.A fundamental step was to assemble andtest a demonstration database, focusing onthe exchange of practical solutions amongfoundries.

In parallel with this, they constructed an Internetportal website (www.ecoinfoundries.net),designed to provide extensive references and

links to clean technologies, current projects,news stories and policy announcements.

Europes ferrous and non- ferrous foundries servethe automotive, aerospace, and white goodsindustries and a variety of other manufacturing

sectors. Together, they generate a turnover ofapproximately EUR 30 billion and providejobs for some 290 000 workers .

Small businesses dominate the sector. Forthe majority of these, signicant individualinvestment in research and development isdifcult or impossible. Yet modernisation isvital.

Recent surveys indicate that the EU is laggingbehind its US and Japanese counterpartsin terms of foundry innovation. Despite the

advantages of proximity in supply chainsinvolving rapid product renewal and on-timedelivery, companies relying on commodityproduction alone are increasingly losingground to competitors in the lower-wagecountries. On the other hand, for morecreative enterprises that are able to contributeeffectively to customers component designand development, opportunities continue toexist.

Even the most progressive rms nevertheless

face growing pressure to cut costs, whilealso dealing with the need to adopt more

Case study

PROJECT NAME: ECO-in- Foundries

COLLAbORATION

FOR ASUSTAINAbLEFUTURE FOR EUFOUNdRIES



27/32

As well as helping to improve competitivenessby building a higher level of knowledgewithin the sector, the website serves to providesuggestions to policymakers at national andEuropean levels regarding measures for thecreation of a favourable operating climate.

Highlighting a broad spectrum of issues andquestions, the website is intended to become

the core of a durable virtual communitymobilising the critical mass of participationthat is essential to lay the ground for futurecollaboration and collective research.

A methodological guide (in downloadableformat) has also been prepared, enablingusers to analyse the nature and extent of theenvironmental issues they face. Its simple,logical layout makes it a straightforward matterfor SMEs to determine the risks associated withspecic activities and ascertain the possibilitiesfor monitoring and remedying them.

OPEN dOOR POLICy

All interested stakeholders are invited to jointhe ECO-in-Foundries network of afliatedcompanies and organisations in pursuingan integrated environmental managementapproach by exchanging best practices,undertaking benchmarking activities andcooperating in joint projects.

Registered members can post their own

corporate proles, advertise their activities topotential partners and exchange information

with companies sharing similar needs. Theycan access functional solutions already testedin other European foundries, as well as contacttechnological centres and suppliers who maybe able to help in their implementation. Bymaking it easy to form partnerships with like-minded enterprises to explore fresh avenues,the network also forms a hub for new bottom-up RTD initiatives as spin-offs from the initiative

itself.

All of these activities were highlighted inthe European Congress on Eco-Informationfor Foundries held in Paris in June 2006.Additionally, an intense promotional drivewas implemented, including the distribution ofan explanatory leaet as well as a strategy ofdirect contact with many foundries. To date,32 SMEs have joined the network, while afurther 60 have expressed interest.

Several suggestions are currently being

explored for project themes to be presentedas follow-up activities under FP7, including theproposal to establish a European technologyplatform on foundries.

OFFICIAL TITLEECO-in-Foundry

COORdINATORUnione Regionale delle Camere

di Commercio I.A.A. del Veneto Eurosportello del Veneto

PARTNERSSogesca (Italy)Danish Technological Institute (Denmark)Assofond (Italy)

Fonderie VDP spa (Italy)Fonderie Zanardi spa (Italy)Fonderie del Montello spa (Italy)Swedish Foundry Association (Sweden)Anysoft (Romania)Centre Technique des Industries de la Fonderie(France)Nordsjllands Metalstberi A/S (Denmark)Ferrodan A/S (Denmark)Fundacin INASMET (Spain)Polish Foundry Institute (Poland)Kemisten Group (Sweden)Odlewnicza Izba Gospodarcza (Poland)

FURTHER INFORMATIONUnione Regionale delle Camere

di Commercio I.A.A. del Veneto

Eurosportello del Veneto+39 041 0999411Mr Gian Angelo Bellati

email: [email protected] Filippo Mazzariol

email: [email protected]

PROjECT COST699 330

EU FUNdING699 330

PROjECT REFERENCEContract No CT-2004- 516251

ECO-IN-FOUNdRIES / 2


28/32


29/32

European Commission

SUPPORTING SME PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES

Luxembourg: Ofce for Ofcial Publications of the European Communities

2007 28 pp. format 21.0 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 92-79-04552-0


30/32


31/32

SALES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS

Publications for sale produced by the Ofce for Ofcial Publications of the European Communities are available from our sales agentsthroughout the world.

How do I set about obtaining a publication?

Once you have obtained the list of sales agents, contact the sales agent of your choice and place your order.

How do I obtain the list of sales agents?

Go to the Publications Ofce website http://publications.europa.eu/ Or apply for a paper copy by fax (352) 2929 42758


32/32

KI-76-06-675-EN-C

While the architects of the EUs Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) were rmly committed to large-scale research collaborationas the means to achieve breakthrough results, they also retained a strong awareness of the need to support the involvement ofSMEs. As well as allocating substantial funds for SME-specic measures, the European Commission made a considerable effort toencourage across-the-board participation of the smaller enterprises that are seen as dynamic drivers of competitiveness and jobcreation in Europe. Despite this, some problems still remained unresolved. These were addressed by special actions introducedduring the lifetime of FP6, resulting in an increase in SME requests for funding. The experience gained of fered some useful lessons,which have been applied to good effect in making FP7 even more SMEfriendly. The thematic priorities have been reviewed,the ceiling percentage of EU support raised, and the nancial risk for small businesses reduced. A more adaptable approach tothe framing of thematic strategies is foreseen and there is greater scope for exibility in the structuring of the various supportmechanisms.

supporting sme - participation in research framework programmes

Documents