University networks look for longer life

Universities involved in the Networks of Excellence established under the EU’s sixth framework programme for research (FP6) say that they have been left high and dry by its successor, FP7.

The idea was that after their initial injection of EU funds, on average lasting four to five years, the networks would become financially independent. However, many networks are now saying that this was not long enough for them to achieve sustainability and that they need additional support if the benefits gained are not to be lost.

Networks of excellence (NoEs) were set up to tackle fragmentation in European research, bringing together leading academic research groups and industrial scientists to pursue projects in high priority topics. This was to be achieved by an integration of their activities, allowing closer collaboration on research projects and training, and more engagement with the public.

While those participating in the NoEs say that they can show that the approach is successful, the benefits have taken longer than hoped for to achieve. "It took a lot of time to get the networks started," says Ingemar Pongratz of the Karolinska Institute, Sweden’s foremost medical university. He is vice-co-ordinator of the Cascade NoE, which involves 24 research groups from nine EU states, working on the health effects of chemical residues in food. It has five years of EU funding, which began in 2004. "It’s only now, in the third year, that all the channels of communication, both external and internal, are settled and we know each other much better. It takes time to build trust among people."

Even with such delays, the NoEs can point to significant successes. Through Cascade, for instance, scientific papers are being signed by five or six research groups in different universities, which is unusual in this field, and research has become more ambitious. "We are now looking at whole food, baby food and bread, in a way that has never been done before," Pongratz says. One research group on its own, he suggests, would never even attempt to do that.

He argues that more time is needed to develop the work to the stage where it can be picked up by other funding mechanisms, whether in the public sector or with commercial partners. The amount of extra time required depends on the network.

"There are networks that are very close to industry in that they are producing some sort of commercial product," says Pongratz, citing as an example research on new coatings for antennas. "A network like that would need maybe another year. In a network like Cascade we are not really close to industry, so we need to wait for new funding schemes that allow a pan-European network to collaborate." He thinks Cascade needs three to four years of extra EU funding, at existing levels.

The campaign for further support was started by the university co-ordinators of six networks, including Cascade, and has now been endorsed by 59 of the 170 NoEs funded under FP6. They represent around 15,000 university and industry researchers. A meeting is planned on 20 November in Brussels to promote their achievements and put the case for continued support.

The Commission has said that the NoEs can apply for FP7 funds for specific projects or activities, but the networks do not consider this a viable option. The campaigners say that it would produce just the sort of fragmentation that they were set up to prevent. Beyond that, the Commission says it is planning to carry out an independent evaluation of the NoEs soon, to see what can be done to make the best use of this instrument in the future.

• Ian Mundell is a freelance journalist based in Brussels.

Universities involved in the Networks of Excellence established under the EU’s sixth framework programme for research (FP6) say that they have been left high and dry by its successor, FP7.