The UK's performance in Framework
Programme 5
44. The Office of Science and Technology
(OST) told the Committee that the UK's performance in FP5 was
strong, with the UK obtaining about 15% of the available funding—the
joint highest return alongside that of Germany.
45. Information on success rates of proposals
for individual calls for proposals are provided to Programme Committee
members on a confidential basis. The annual reports and technological
development activities of the European Union provide information
on the number of proposals received each year and the number of
proposals selected for funding each year. It is not, however,
possible to calculate "success rates" as proposals selected
in one year may have been received in the previous year.[48]
46. According to OST statistics, the UK
continually wins more funding through competitive bids to Framework
Programmes than it pays through UK membership of the EU (OST statistics).[49]
RCUK told the Committee that, under the FP5 Quality of Life Programme,
the UK was involved in around 75% of proposals submitted, around
80% of which were awarded. This provided a significant financial
return (above the UK juste retour—that is above the
UK contribution to Framework Programmes as a Member State). Statistics
collated by OST show that during the first three years of FP5,
the UK's total return from EU R&D expenditure was €1457.7
million.[50]
47. RCUK also gave details of the UK's success
in the Framework mobility programmes, with approximately 30% of
all EU fellowships held in the UK (whilst only 6% of fellowships
are held by UK nationals going to other European countries).[51]
This can be explained in part by the fact that more continental
Europeans speak English than the reverse.
48. The Office of Science and Technology
provided information to the Committee on the scale of participation
by UK organisations and individuals in FP5.[52]
Up to 2001, there had been 8,319 participants in FP5. 1,437 were
from Higher Education Institutes (at 43%, the highest percentage
of participation from this category in the EU); 980 participants
were from industry (29% of UK participants, second highest in
the EU behind Germany); 635 were from small and medium enterprises
(SMEs) (19% of UK participants, second highest in the EU behind
Germany); and 25, 490 co-operation links were formed between UK
organisations and those in other Framework Programme participating
countries.[53]
49. In Brussels the Committee was told by
the Research Directorate General that of all the European Countries,
the UK had shown the most interest in the Framework Programmes
and got the biggest share of project funding. Countries such as
the UK, France, Germany and Belgium, with stronger, more competitive
national research programmes, had done better than others from
the programmes.
50. The Government told the Committee that,
according to an independent survey, 88% of researchers attained
or exceeded their goals for forming European partnerships or networks
and 94% enhanced their knowledge bases.[54]
51. The Government told the Committee that
it was hard to quantify the wider benefits which industry and
research obtain from participation in Framework Programme: increasing
research skills, accessing international markets, sharing risk
or developing key industry standards. Professor Sir David King,
the Chief Scientific Adviser told the Committee "a big plus
arising from all the of the activity funded by the Framework Programmes
is learning about good practice from other countries in the EU
[…] it terms of producing value for money for research I
think that is where we have the benchmark".[55]
He continued, "the measures of success are whether we raise
our level of activity by comparing with the best in Europe […]
the European Union provides a very good test against which we
can measure ourselves".[56]
Professor King cited the example of the significant support given
by German Länder to R & D, particularly SMEs. SMEs in
the UK are not winning the same amount of European research funding
as their German counterparts, and Professor King suggested that
UK RDAs could learn from the German example.[57]
The Government also confirmed that it benefits from the generation
of new knowledge which can help to inform important policy issues.[58]
52. When asked how the Commission measures
the success of the Framework Programmes, Dr John Taylor, Director
General of the Research Councils answered: "they would say,
to what extent is it really building on wealth-creation and prosperity
in Europe, on the one hand, and the creation and development of
an European Research Area on the other?"[59]
53. Whilst there are no conclusive statistics
available from the European Commission on the amount of funding
received by the UK from FP5, the indications are that the UK did
better than most, if not all, of the other countries participating
in FP5. That does not necessarily mean value for money: but it
does speak volumes for the relative strength of the UK science
base.
2 
