Race for the ERA Act begins as MEP unveils early proposal

The European Parliament has started work on a proposal pre-empting the European Research Area (ERA) Act due to be put forward by the European Commission in 2026. The move is an attempt to set the terms of the debate, calling in particular for a dedicated legislative proposal protecting scientific freedom.

The ERA was conceived in 2000 to address national rules and systems thought to be impeding scientists and innovators from collaborating across Europe’s internal borders. However, its largely voluntary initiatives have failed to create the desired single market for research and innovation. The goal of the ERA Act is to create legally binding obligations that will make it a reality.

The Commission’s proposal was initially due in 2027, but research Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva pushed for it to be brought forward to 2026, so that the legislation can be finalised before the end of the current EU political mandate.

While the legislative process only officially begins when the Commission publishes its proposal for the ERA Act, the Parliament has found a way of pre-empting this by tabling an oral question with a motion for a resolution on the ERA Act.

The report on this question, drafted by Eszter Lakos of the European People’s Party group, was presented to the Parliament’s research and industry committee on December 4. In line with current EU dogma, Lakos puts the emphasis on competitiveness.

“We have to be more conscious of how much the ERA could bring in; not just making researchers better off, but [helping Europe to be] truly competitive on the global stage,” Lakos told Science|Business after the committee’s meeting.

As such, the ERA could become Europe’s next major strategic tool, she said, keeping talent in Europe, drawing in private capital, and turning the bloc’s long-promised 3% research investment target into reality.

Related articles:

• Zaharieva plans ‘ambitious but realistic’ ERA Act
• Commission to launch public consultation on ERA Act

The proposal in Lakos’ report has four main priorities:

Safeguarding the freedom of scientific research
The draft calls for a separate and dedicated legislative proposal protecting academic freedom, coupled with common ethical standards.

A strong, binding and coherent ERA framework
Lakos proposes introducing the ERA Act as a piece of legislation, “possibly a regulation,” she said, accompanied by complementary legal measures to improve governance, streamline monitoring and reporting, and rationalise existing policy instruments. Alignment with other major EU initiatives will be essential, she said.

Investment, and the elusive 3%
The draft urges the Commission to include the 3% of GDP target for public and private R&D expenditure in the Act, and to support national targets and roadmaps. The EU average is currently around 2.2% of GDP. The draft also emphasises private investment, calling for incentives that align private capital with EU strategic priorities.

Researchers: circulation, careers and working conditions
The draft proposes removing barriers to the circulation of researchers, improving mutual recognition of qualifications and simplifying visas. It also pushes for stronger research careers, better working conditions, gender equality and equal opportunities, as well as secure and responsible circulation of knowledge, while protecting intellectual property and research security. 

“What is dear to my heart is putting more flesh on the bones when it comes to framework conditions for researchers; better circulation, better working conditions,” Lakos said. “If [researchers] are well off, the entire ERA is better off.” A more attractive ERA, she added, is essential for attracting and retaining European talent globally. 

The political challenge

Lakos aims for the Parliament to adopt its joint motion for a resolution, together with accompanying questions to the Commission, by March 2026, setting the tone for the upcoming negotiations.

She expects Parliament to take a firm stance on the 3% target, but said that delivering it will be politically tough. “Considering the different economic priorities and the geopolitical situation, I think it won’t be easy because, at the end of the day, the decision lies with the member states,” she told Science|Business.

But she pointed to defence spending as evidence that collective commitments are possible. “You look at the NATO 5%, for instance. That was also voluntarily agreed by member states. So, if there is political will, the way is found.”