Associated countries weigh up leaked plans for next Framework Programme

Non-EU countries associated to Horizon Europe have reacted warily to leaked draft proposals for the bloc’s next research Framework Programme, with confusion over whether they will also have to join a mooted European Competitiveness Fund to make the most of the programme. 

Earlier this week, long-anticipated plans for the next Framework Programme, known informally as FP10, leaked, and the Brussels research bubble has been poring over them to decipher what they might mean. 

One key test will be the reaction of associated countries such as the UK, Switzerland, New Zealand, Canada and South Korea, which have expanded the reach of the existing Horizon Europe programme globally and contribute a sizable chuck of its budget. 

But now they must weigh up whether it’s worth joining a revamped successor programme from 2028. 

“My first reaction is fairly positive,” said one associated country science diplomat, who wanted to remain anonymous. “It’s not as much revolution as feared.” 

Another science diplomat rated the plans as “5/10” but “with some tweaks the mark can be brought up significantly. We will be relying on member states.” 

Probably the biggest change for associated countries is the introduction of a parallel European Competitiveness Fund, which aims to consolidate a grab bag of programmes, from Digital Europe to EU4Health, into a more tightly steered overarching instrument. 

This fund will be “tightly connected” to the next research Framework Programme, helping define objectives, for example, and so associated countries are fretting over whether they also need to be associated to parts of the Competitiveness Fund to fully benefit. 

Pillar 2 of the new Framework Programme, which supports collaborative research consortia, will be steered particularly closely by the Competitiveness Fund. 

“Does [association to] FP10 guarantee you access to everything in Pillar 2?” asked the first associated countries science diplomat. “I don’t know how it will work. The European Commission needs to clarify.” 

“The challenge will be that this lack of clarity means associated states will need to see the work programmes to determine if association is value for money,” said the second diplomat. 

Double association?

As expected, the leaked plans set out association conditions for the next Framework Programme, and keep the requirement that joining countries must have “respect of human rights, backed by democratic institutions,” a clause that led to criticism over association negotiations with authoritarian Singapore. 

But the Competitiveness Fund also allows “full or partial association” and contains no democracy or human rights clauses. 

Related articles:

• Commission draft proposal for FP10 leaked 
• Exclusive: Singapore ‘respects human rights’ claims the Commission in ‘sensitive’ Horizon Europe document

“I do not think that countries need to associate to both, but I could imagine package solutions where association to parts of both programmes comes with a larger cooperation agreement,” said Thomas Jørgensen, director for policy coordination and foresight at the European University Association. 

The Competitiveness Fund is “very focused on concrete areas, some of which (defence) will probably be off the table for all except the very closest of close friends,” he said. 

Some countries, perhaps Switzerland for example, could agree with the EU to work together on specific areas, say biotechnology, and then associate to these parts of the fund, Jørgensen suggested. 

Exclusions

There is also concern that the new plans give the EU much more sweeping powers to shut associated countries out of calls where sensitive technologies are at stake. 

Under Horizon Europe, the EU already has the power to shut out non-EU partners where research projects impinge on the bloc’s “strategic assets, interests, autonomy or security.” In the past, Brussels used this power to shut the UK, Switzerland and Israel out of certain quantum and space calls. 

But the leaked plans for the next programme simply say that “third countries may be excluded from parts of the programme,” without any caveats. 

“On exclusions there are no limitations anymore. The ones before were dire but now there is nothing,” said the second science counsellor. 

Above all, associated countries want more clarification on how association will work, but for now, the Commission isn’t commenting on leaked documents. It should officially make its plan public on 16 July, shedding more light on how the new Framework Programme will work. 

“There’s lots of questions,” said the first science diplomat. “It’s very thin,” they added, referring to the leaked plans. 

“Good that FP10 remained open and standalone, but the devil is in the detail,” said a third associated country science diplomat, who was still reviewing the leaked proposals.