FP10 should break down barriers between industry and academia, says EMBL

The European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) is calling for more focus on the translation of the fundamental insights its research generates, and for greater interchange between academia and industry in the next framework research programme, FP10

In a position paper, EMBL, which is supported by 29 governments and has six research facilities across Europe, says backing for collaborative and interdisciplinary fundamental research should be at the heart of the programme, due to begin in 2028.

Last month more than 100 industry organisations signed a joint statement calling for greater industry involvement in FP10, saying this should be achieved by putting more money into Pillar II, which includes the large scale public-private partnerships, and which already gets just over half of the funding in the current research programme Horizon Europe.

But while EMBL director general Edith Heard said more collaboration between industry and academia as called for in the industry statement would be positive, the focus should not be on strengthening the industry-focused Pillar 2 at the expense of academic research.

Such silos “should not exist anymore,” Heard told Science|Business. “At EMBL, we do basic academic research, but we live with industry,” she said.

As one example, the UK pharma company GSK has a building on EMBL’s campus in Heidelberg, enabling conversations and the exchange of views. “They want this continual two-way flow, which happens very naturally,” said Heard.

Another example is Open Targets, a collaboration that involves EMBL’s European Bioinformatics Institute in Cambridge, UK, and five pharmaceutical companies, which was set up ten years ago to improve how targets are selected for drug discovery.

It may not be possible to overcome silos entirely, but it is important to continue funding both academic and applied research, Heard said.  If not, there is a risk of a “drain of funds, resources and talent into industrial applications and industrial jobs.”

There is already some evidence of this drift. “The scientific community is wondering where all the post docs are going right now. Many of them are going to industry,” said Heard. “It shouldn’t be a problem if they can come back and have one foot in both areas, but it’s a problem right now because it’s not easy for that fluidity to happen.”

The position paper says science should be recognised as an essential asset to EU competitiveness.

Translating knowledge

EMBL’s position paper calls for “small-scale” research and innovation partnerships between academia and industry to promote the translation of knowledge generated in fundamental research into innovations. Heard says these could take the form of a new type of call under the European Research Council (ERC), the European Innovation Council, or a “call in Pillar I that enables post docs to participate in joint endeavours between academia and industry”.

Research institutions should also be supported in building long-term, discovery-driven partnerships with industry, EMBL says. “By enabling institutions to engage with industry partners without the pressure of immediate market-driven goals, we also cultivate an environment where fundamental research thrives alongside applied sciences.”

EMBL recommends new models to incentivise researchers to pursue innovative ideas beyond the initial research phase, such as top-up funding to support the formation of start-ups.  It also wants to expand existing instruments such as the proof of concept grants from the ERC, which allow researchers to explore the innovation potential of their ERC-funded research.

Interdisciplinary approach

Heard is not alone in believing that addressing challenges, from climate change to adopting artificial intelligence across multiple sectors, requires barriers to be broken down, between the different pillars of Horizon Europe, between disciplines, and between countries.

“I would ask that there is an acceptance that there have to be funding channels that go across pillars and go across disciplines. That hasn't necessarily happened in the past in any of the framework programmes,” she said.

Facilitating cross-border research and innovation requires a focus on mobility and transnational access to research infrastructures. Heard argues there should be more sustained funding in FP10 for researchers to access EU-funded research facilities.

Strengthening funding for fundamental research through instruments such as the ERC could be another solution. “Europe can only fulfil its potential if we can get people to work across borders,” she said. “Where frontiers suddenly appear is when national funding becomes so limited that it's a kind of mad scramble internally to make sure that people protect their national science.”

Heard welcomed Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s pledge to “expand” the ERC and EIC, and says it’s important the two organisations “do not work in isolation from one another”.

Former Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta, who was asked by the European Council and Commission to write a report on the future of the EU internal market, shares many of these concerns. His report calls for research, innovation and education to become the fifth freedom of the single market, alongside goods, services, capital and labour.

One of the issues the report highlights is the brain drain of European research talent, which Letta says is undermining the EU’s innovation capacity.

For EMBL, FP10 can guard against brain drain by supporting research development from early career researchers to established scientists, and including research managers and research-enabling roles.

“AI uptake, more specifically, will require tailor-made interdisciplinary training programmes that support upskilling and mobility at all levels, while ensuring that research environments are future-proof and can retain talent,” EMBL says.

The Widening measures supporting research and innovation in low-performing countries are an essential piece of this jigsaw, and EMBL wants them to be maintained in FP10. This is a odds with other calls to move them out of the programme.

People around the world are envious of the ERC. Europe needs to ensure that researchers in smaller countries or from newer members of the EU are able to benefit from this prestige, Heard said.