Italy lobbies for standalone FP10

Italy’s research organisations, MEPs and government officials are pushing back against plans to reorganise EU research and innovation funding, as the mediterranean country relies on EU Framework Programmes to pad its national R&D budget and establish collaborations around the world. 

Italy’s R&D sector wants to push for an ambitious and autonomous FP10, going against plans by the European Commission to incorporate the successor to Horizon Europe into a new Competitiveness Fund to be launched under the multiannual budget due to start in 2028.

As diplomats and research stakeholders warn that the window for convincing the Commission’s top brass to drop the idea is closing fast, Italian R&D stakeholders gathered in Brussels to discuss how to ensure that FP10 is “ambitious, autonomous and transdisciplinary [. . .], aligned with national interests,” Italian research minister Anna Maria Bernini said in a message to delegates at an event hosted by the Italian Agency for the Promotion of European Research (APRE) in Brussels this month. 

According to an analysis by APRE, Italy has secured €3.76 billion from Horizon Europe since the start of the programme and government officials admit the money is a nice addition to Italy’s national R&D budget. The country spends only 1.31% of GDP on research, less than the EU average of 2.22%, and it’s outranked even by its small neighbour Slovenia. 

“[EU] framework programmes are strategic, as they are essential for research and innovation,” said Fabio Fava, professor of industrial and environmental biotechnology at the University of Bologna. “Often, our national funding falls short, it lacks the breadth needed to develop, validate, and transfer strategic know-how,” he said.

In the European Parliament, there is an Italian cross-party consensus on FP10’s independence. Elena Donazzan of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) and Giorgio Gori for the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), both vice-chairs of the Parliament's ITRE Committee, agreed on a common position. “It is essential to maintain an independent framework programme with adequate resources,” said Gori.

Earlier this month, both the Parliament and the Council adopted their positions over the Horizon Europe’s successor, emphasising that FP10 should remain a “standalone” Framework Programme.

Recommended reading

• Fight intensifies over an ‘independent’ FP10

While a standalone Framework Programme would appear to be written into Article 182 of the EU treaties, there are suspicions that the Commission may be looking into a legal workaround that allows it to fold FP10 into the new Competitiveness Fund.

But research leaders in Italy say that would be a mistake. “Failing to have a research framework programme would disregard [. . .] the Framework Programme as a cornerstone of the EU and the European Research Area,” said Maria Chiara Carrozza, president of the National Research Council of Italy. “At a time like this, taking a step backwards on the Framework Programme would be EU’s biggest mistake.”

Carrozza warned that without a standalone FP10, the programme could become a fragmented collection of measures lacking cohesion and a clear strategy, both of which are crucial for advancing science and technology in Europe. "The risk of not having it is losing the thread," she told Science|Business.

The Framework Programm also has a diplomatic significance. When collaborating with global partners such as Canada, "we cannot act as Italy or as individual states, we must act as Europe, and [the Framework Programme] is the only tool we have to do so."

Cristina Pedicchio, president of APRE, echoed these concerns, warning that the absence of a strong and independent research framework programme would be disastrous for Europe. However, she remained optimistic about the Commission’s forthcoming decision.

“We are confident that there will be a research and innovation programme, regardless of what it will be called,” Pedicchio told Science|Business. However, “[FP10] must remain autonomous, ambitious, and have its own dedicated budget and governance.”