the european social fund: developing human potential in...

Background report

The european social fund: developing human poTenTial in research and innovaTion

imporTanT noTe

This study is produced by Bernard Brunhes International (BBI, www.bb-international.eu) under the contract

“Reporting on ESF interventions in the EU.” The background report was prepared by Dr. Michael Himmer

and Karen Siegel in cooperation with BBI’s team of researchers: Livia Di Nardo, Georgios Voudouris, João

Nunes and Bruno Vilela. A brochure summarising the findings of this study is available in English, French,

German, Spanish, Italian and Polish at http://ec.europa.eu/esf

Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission may be held responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this publication.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).

europe direct is a service to help you find answers to your

questions about the european union

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow

access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

© European Union, 2010Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.Printed in BelgiumPRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER

1The European Social Fund: Developing Human Potential in Research and Innovation

Table of Contents

List of abbreviations 2

Introduction 3

A. SCOPE OF THE STUDY 3B. THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND: FRAMEWORK & ACHIEVEMENTS 4C. APPROACH 11

Chapter 1: Human potential in research and innovation - trends and challenges 13

A. THE EU’S POSITION IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION AND THE EUROPEAN POLICY FRAMEWORK 13B. TOPICS ADDRESSED THROUGH ESF 22C. RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN THE ESF REGULATIONS 26

1. ESF-Programming Period 2000-2006 262. ESF-Programming Period 2007-2013 27

Chapter 2: ESF interventions and achievements on human potential in research and innovation 29

A. HUMAN POTENTIAL IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION AS A TARGET OF ESF SUPPORT 29B. GENERAL FINDINGS: ESF FUNDING AND BENEFICIARIES 30

1. ESF funding in fi gures 302. Profi le of ESF benefi ciaries 323. Who are the participants? 344. What medium to long-term benefi ts did the ESF bring to the research and innovation sector? 36

C. DEVELOPMENTS IN TERTIARY EDUCATION 361. Raising the skills profi le and increasing the research capacity 372. Mobility in research and innovation and international cooperation 403. Improving access to higher education for all and promotion of equal opportunities 41

D. COOPERATION AND KNOW-HOW TRANSFER BETWEEN RESEARCH INSTITUTES AND THE BUSINESS SECTOR 421. Improving employment through cooperation 422. Know-how transfer to companies and innovation 433. Competence centres and high-tech cooperation 46

E. ESF SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN POTENTIAL IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN 2007-2013 46

Chapter 3: Conclusions and perspective 52

Annexes 55

ANNEX 1: EXPENDITURE 2000-2006 AND BUDGET 2007-2013 55ANNEX 2: ESF VOCABULARY 57ANNEX 3: LIST OF ESF 2000-2006 MEASURES USED FOR THE STUDY 58ANNEX 4: STANDARDISED INDICATOR NAMES USED FOR ANALYSIS 62ANNEX 5: LIST OF ESF 2007-2013 PRIORITY AXES USED FOR THE STUDY 67

Index of fi gures, tables and insights 70

2 The European Social Fund: Developing Human Potential in Research and Innovation

Country codes

AT Austria IT Italy

BE Belgium JP Japan

BG Bulgaria LT Lithuania

CH Switzerland LU Luxembourg

CY Cyprus LV Latvia

CZ Czech Republic MT Malta

DE Germany NL Netherlands

DK Denmark NO Norway

EE Estonia PL Poland

ES Spain PT Portugal

FI Finland RO Romania

FR France SE Sweden

GR Greece SI Slovenia

HR Croatia SK Slovakia

HU Hungary TR Turkey

IE Ireland UK United Kingdom

IL Israel US United States

IS Iceland

Other abbreviations

EIT European Institute of Innovation and Technology

EQF European Qualifi cations Framework

ERA European Research Area

ESF European Social Fund

EU European Union

GDP Gross Domestic Product

ICT Information and Communication Technologies

KICs Knowledge and Innovation Communities

OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

OP Operational Programme

R&D Research and Development

SFC EC Structural Funds fi nancial database

SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise

List of abbreviations

3Introduction

Introduction

A. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The world is increasingly based on knowledge. Research, science and the exploitation of knowledge are central

elements of a knowledge-based society. In recent years the EU Structural Funds, including the European Social

Fund (ESF), have made an important contribution to boosting human potential in research and innovation. The

achievements of the ESF in particular will be presented in this study.

World-wide competition to attract investment in research and innovation is growing. Besides the US and Japan

new competitors have emerged, such as China, India and Brazil. For Europe this means that no EU Member State

can succeed in isolation. More research activities and turning new ideas into new products and services are crucial

for the creation of new jobs in Europe. Therefore, research and innovation have been confi rmed as key parts of the

Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs. European interventions are designed to support and complement the eff orts

of national governments and the private sector.

A skilled, trained and adaptable workforce is vital for the labour market and the economy as a whole and for research

and science in particular. In response regulatory frameworks in the EU Member States are being adapted and the

international dimension is gaining importance in national policies for tertiary education.

Besides the changes in research and science, links between business and education, training and research are

crucial. Every transfer between these systems, individually and institutionally, is worthwhile and contributes

to increasing human potential in research and innovation. By improving their human potential, regions and

Member States become more attractive for economic development. Investments into research and development

(“R&D”), technological innovation, and modern methods of management, are central to labour productivity and

growth and ensure a more skilled, trained and adaptable workforce. Research work must essentially be based

on the needs of society and concentrate more on application-focused research and development. Companies

have to react faster to structural changes and the changing demands of the markets. This is why the European

Union promotes research programmes and funds projects of cooperation between business and research

institutions.

Research institutions all over the world expand their mission beyond research and teaching to facilitate closer

cooperation with the productive sector and to contribute to innovation more eff ectively. The modernisation

of the higher education system is no longer an optional activity but a necessity. As part of this modernisation

higher education institutions are encouraged to provide a supportive environment for networking activities and

partnership models in order to promote innovation.

The ESF, created in 1957, is the EU’s main fi nancial instrument for investing in people. In 2007, Commissioner Vladimir

Špidla declared at the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the ESF that it “transforms the values of the European


social model into tangible reality”1. Member States and regions devise their own ESF priorities in order to respond

to their needs. The ESF supports employment and helps people enhance their education and skills. Additionally,

ESF programmes are often used to try out new approaches and ideas. Developing human potential in research and

innovation is one fi eld of action of the ESF.

This study gives an overview of the contribution of the ESF to enhancing human potential in the areas of research

and innovation in the EU. Chapter 1 gives a general introduction to the study and the current thinking on

international and European initiatives. Discussion is about the broader framework of this theme including statistics

from international organisations and the European Union as well as policy initiatives to foster the development

of human potential in research and innovation. Chapter 2 reports on the achievements of the ESF in terms of

promoting human potential in research and innovation. The chapter presents fi nancial data and physical indicators

such as the number of people or organisations that participated in activities funded by ESF, or the number of projects

which received support. The main focus of Chapter 2 is on the last fi nancing period (2000-2006). An overview of

the current period (2007-2013) is also given but it is necessarily more limited as little data on implementation and

achievements is already available. Finally, Chapter 3 summarises the fi ndings and provides some conclusions about

how successful the ESF has been in terms of promoting human potential in research and innovation.

B. THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND: FRAMEWORK & ACHIEVEMENTS

The ESF is one of the EU’s Structural Funds set up to reduce the gap in living standards between regions and

between people and to promote economic and social cohesion across Europe. The ESF is devoted to promoting

employment in the EU. It helps Member States make Europe’s workforce and companies better equipped to face

new and global challenges. The ESF was created in 1957 at the time when the European Economic Community

was established. While the overall purpose of the Fund has remained unchanged, its objectives and scope of

application have been adapted to socio-economic developments. The ESF strategy and budget is negotiated and

decided between the EU Member States, the European Parliament and the Commission. On this basis, seven-year

Operational Programmes (OPs) are planned by Member States together with the European Commission.

Programming Period 2000-2006

In the period 2000-2006, the Structural Funds were grouped around 3 Objectives2: Objective 1 promoted the

development of regions where the GDP per capita was below 75% of the EU average, outlying regions (e.g. Azores)

and sparsely populated regions in Finland and Sweden; Objective 2 supported areas adjusting to change in the

industrial and services sector, rural areas in decline, urban areas in diffi culty, and economically depressed areas

heavily dependent on fi sheries; Objective 3 provided funding throughout the EU to help adapt and modernise

policies and systems of education, training and employment. Objectives 1 and 2 were fi nanced by the ESF in

combination with other Structural Funds. Objective 3 was fi nanced solely by ESF.

1. Speech of Commissioner Špidla in Potsdam on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the European Social Fund, 28 June 2007, Speech/07/444

2. http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/g24203.htm

5

ESF supported activities related to fi ve Policy Fields: (i) the development and promotion of active labour market

policies; (ii) the promotion of equal opportunities for all in accessing the labour market, with particular emphasis

on those exposed to social exclusion; (iii) the promotion and improvement of training, education and counselling

as part of lifelong learning policy; (iv) the promotion of a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce; and (v) the

improvement of women’s access to and participation in the labour market. Across all programmes, the ESF has

also addressed three horizontal themes: (i) support for local initiatives concerning employment; (ii) the social and

labour market dimensions of the information society; and (iii) equal opportunities for women and men as part of

the mainstreaming approach.

Between 2000 and 2006 a total of 212 OPs3 were implemented by either regional or national authorities in the

Member States. In 2000, the ESF was open to 15 Member States. Additional OPs were set up in 2004 to accommodate

the priorities of 10 new Member States. The distribution of the programmes and the total ESF co-funded expenditure

per Objective is presented in Figure 1.

Between 2000 and 2006, over 75 million participants4 were involved in ESF funded activities.

Figure 1: Number of OPs and total ESF co-funded expenditure per Objective in the ESF 2000-2006 period

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3

Budget in € billionNumber of OPs

58

5

106

4952

47

Source: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008 (2000-2006)

3. The research is based on data collected for 207 OPs covering the years 2000 to 2006. The remaining programmes are technical assistance OPs and

a specifi c transnational OP promoting the peace process in Northern Ireland. The Equal Operational Programmes are not covered

4. The fi ndings are based on a total of 1,557 measures of which 1,234 have reported on participants.

Introduction


Figure 2: Average yearly participation per Member State

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

ES FR PT DE IT GB EU 25

PL GR IE SE BE AT FI CZ NL HU SK SI LV LT DK EE CY LU MT

Source: Data compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programme reports 2000-2006

This corresponds to approximately a fi fth of the total population between 16-64 years5 in the 25 EU Member States.

These fi gures do not take into account double counting the extent of which is unknown. Participants may have

benefi ted from more than one ESF intervention. In the case of Portugal, no aggregated data were available so

data from the diff erent years were added up. In Spain, participants could be funded under national and regional

programmes at the same time. Furthermore, for the Netherlands limited data is available.

Figure 3: The proportion of the yearly average of ESF benefi ciaries per Member State in relation to the

total population between 16-64 years per Member State

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

PT ES IE FR GR SE BE FI SI AT LV IT UK DE SL CZ PL HU LT LU NL EE MT CY DK

Proportion on ESF beneficiaries per MS in 2006 (yearly values)

EU Average

Source: Eurostat 2008 and for ESF, data compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programme reports 2000-2006

5. Eurostat, Europe in fi gures, Eurostat Yearbook 2008, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/publications/eurostat_yearbook

7

On an annual basis, ESF reached on average nearly 4% of the total EU-25 population between 16 - 64 years in the

25 EU Member States. In most of the Member States the yearly proportion of the active population benefi tting

from ESF money was lower. Exceptions to this were Portugal, Spain, Ireland and to a lesser extent France, Greece

and Sweden. New Member States started later with the programming and this may explain the lower proportion of

the active population addressed through ESF. Moreover in some Member States operational programmes focussed

more on assistance to systems and structures than in others.

The total ESF community expenditure was € 54 billion in the period 2000-2006. This amount was matched, through

the basic principle of co-funding within ESF with about € 51 billion from the public and private sectors in the Member

States concerned. A detailed breakdown of the fi nancial allocations per Member State is available in Annex 1.

Figure 4: Total ESF co-funded expenditure per Member State:

proportion between ESF and Member State funds

Source: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008 (2000-2006)

The average percentage of the total ESF co-funded expenditure committed by the Member States to ESF activities

was 51.3%. The share of the ESF budget that each Member States received depended on several factors, such as

the size of the population and the objective covered6. On average the new Member States received a higher share

of ESF funding, which can be explained by the need for these countries to catch up with the global European

economy. Funding was allocated to Member States where support was most needed to ensure that the whole of

EU moved forward.

6. Priority Objectives in 2000-2006 have been defi ned on the basis of the per capita gross domestic product (GDP). Objective 1 territory were the ones

with a GDP lower than 75% of the Community average, Objective 2 programmes were aimed at helping regions with indications of industrial

decline; Objective 3 programmes were not geographically targeted and delivered the European Employment Strategy. http://europa.eu/scadplus/

leg/en/lvb/g24203.htm

Introduction


The average total expenditure per ESF benefi ciary was € 1,306 (€ 669 was the average ESF budget per benefi ciary).

Some Member States like Denmark and Luxembourg, but also Germany and the Netherlands exceeded this average

amount considerably. This may refl ect a stronger focus of the Operational Programmes on assistance to systems and

structures.

Figure 5: Total ESF co-funded expenditure per participant per Member State (in €)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

DK LU DE NL GB SE EE FI LT IT GR PL BE MT HU SK AT PT LV IE CZ FR ES SI CY

Total Expenditure per participant

EU 25 Average ESF expenditure per participant

Source: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008 (2000-2006) data compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programme

reports 2000-2006

The ESF supported two types of interventions, assisting people and systems. Actions targeting the enhancement

of systems (e.g. capacity building in Public Employment Services or the modernisation of vocational education and

training systems) will ultimately address individual benefi ciaries, too. However, such programmes tend not to have

the same number of participants as those interventions directly aimed at e.g. training disadvantaged sections of the

population in acquiring a better position for the labour market or supporting researchers to pursue part of their work

in another region or country. Member States implementing more system-related interventions had a relatively lower

number of participants and therefore the average ESF budget spent on each participant may be somewhat higher.

Figure 6: ESF community expenditure per participant per Member State (in €)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

DK EE LU NL DE LT GB GR PL SE IT MT HU FI SK LV PT CZ AT BE IE ES SI FR CY

ESF Expenditure per participant

EU 25 Average ESF expenditure per participant

Source: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008 (2000-2006) data compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programme

reports 2000-2006

9

The ESF Regulation strongly refl ected the EU’s commitment to eliminate inequalities between women and men

following a combined approach of gender mainstreaming and specifi c activities for women in diff erent fi elds. ESF

resulted in a balanced participation of women and men: 52% of the participants are women and 48% are men.

Figure 7: Gender breakdown of ESF participants

women52%

men48%


Most Member States had a balanced division of male and female participants. Seven Member States had a proportion

of female participants exceeding 55% (Malta, Poland, Lithuania, Ireland, Portugal, Greece and Austria where 64% of

the participants were women).

37% of the ESF participants were young people (< 25 years) while 7% were benefi ciaries aged 50 years and older7.

ESF helped to prepare young people to fi nd suitable work and to succeed in their jobs. It assisted older workers to

stay in employment, by e.g. re-skilling programmes.

ESF addressed both employed and unemployed people: 54% of ESF participants were unemployed, of whom 25%

were long term unemployed, 42% short term unemployed and 33% were not further specifi ed. 38% were employed

people of whom 4% self-employed. Another 7% of the participants were inactive, e.g. students.

Figure 8: Status of ESF participants in the labour market

Unemployed54%

Employed38%

Inactive8%


7 . These two percentages were calculated independently. For the calculation of the proportion of young people and older persons, the maximum

number of data was used for each of the respective categories. The proportions were calculated on the basis of all measures including data on

young people on the one hand and on older persons on the other hand.

Introduction


8. These rates have been calculated on the number of measures on which data on participants gaining a qualifi cation have been reported.

9. These rates have been calculated on the number of measures on which data on participants integrated into the labour market have been reported.

Furthermore, 700,000 projects were funded. The majority of these projects were reported by Operational Programmes

in Italy and Germany. In Germany, most of the 170,000 projects funded through ESF were situated in the priority

‘promotion of the work force potential and of equal opportunities’, while in Italy about 400,000 projects were spread

over various programmes and priorities.

Not all Member States have reported in the same way on results, meaning that in practice the scope and size of the

results are expected to be higher.

The success rate of participants gaining a qualifi cation was on average 34%. Success rates above 75% were achieved

in Greece (97%), Estonia (89%) and Latvia (85%)8. 22% of the participants were integrated into the labour market.

Particularly high success rates were reported by Portugal (91%) and Slovakia (72%)9. The success rates were largely

infl uenced by the type of target group ESF addressed, i.e. groups at risk for which it is diffi cult to, for example, (re)

integrate into the labour market. Moreover, not all measures aimed at the achievement of a formal qualifi cation or

at an immediate integration in the labour market.

The creation of 600,000 jobs with ESF funds was reported particularly in Spain and Greece. In Spain 152,227 jobs

were created leading to self-employment. In Greece the majority of jobs were created in the framework of the

programme ‘employment promotion and vocational training’. This programme was entirely devoted to job creation,

including actions aiming at combating (long-term) unemployment, creating conditions to ensure job positions in

enterprises and strengthening the acquisition of work experience.

About 200,000 jobs were safeguarded as a result of ESF interventions. Finland and France reported particularly good

results. The results in France were mainly related to the programme Midi-Pyrénées.

Programming Period 2007-2013

In the current period 2007-2013, the Structural Funds are concentrated around 3 new Objectives: (i) Convergence

concerns the least developed regions, comparable to the old Objective 1, and aims to help the least-developed

Member States and regions catch up more quickly with the EU average by improving conditions for growth and

employment; (ii) Regional Competitiveness and Employment concerns the rest of the EU and aims to strengthen

the competitiveness, employment and attractiveness of all regions; and (iii) European territorial cooperation aims at

strengthening cross-border, trans-national and interregional cooperation through joint local and regional initiatives.

The ESF is supporting activities under the fi rst two Objectives that relate to the following Priorities: (i) adaptability

of workers and enterprises; (ii) improved access to employment and the sustainable inclusion in the labour market

of job seekers and inactive people; (iii) reinforcing the social inclusion of disadvantaged people with a view to

their sustainable integration in employment and combating all forms of discrimination in the labour market; (iv)

enhancing human capital by promoting reform in education and training systems, as well as networking activities

between higher education institutions, research centres and enterprises; and (v) promoting good governance,

11

partnership and the involvement of social partners. Moreover, ESF addresses additional priorities under the

Convergence Objective: (i) expanding and improving investment in human capital, in particular by increasing the

participation in education and training through the life-cycle and by developing human potential in research and

innovation; and (ii) improving the institutional capacity and effi ciency of public administrations and public services

at national, regional and local level.

The current programming period features 117 OPs for all 27 Member States, including Bulgaria and Romania which did not

participate at all in the previous ESF period. Half of the programmes concern Regional Competitiveness and Employment

(59 OPs), while 42 OPs belong to the Convergence objective. The remaining 16 OPs contain initiatives for both objectives.

The total co-funded budget available for ESF related interventions in the period 2007-2013 is € 117 billion, of which € 76

billion is contributed by the ESF. A detailed breakdown per Member State is available in Annex 1.

The programming, implementation and fi nancing procedures for the 2007-2013 period were simplifi ed for all

Structural Funds. In so far as the ESF is concerned, the current period features a strong link with the objectives of the

Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs: the ESF is supporting Member States’ policies to comply with the guidelines

and recommendations adopted in the European Employment Strategy. The most important ESF concepts and

documents across the programming periods are described in Annex 2.

In 2007 and 2008 more than 6 million participants entered ESF funded interventions. There are slightly more women

(52%) than men (48%). 22% of the participants are unemployed and other 8% is long term unemployed; 14% are

inactive and 18% are in education or training. The remaining group of 36% is employed and 2% is self-employed.

Of this group of ESF participants in the period 2007-2008, 22% are younger than 25; while 5% are 50 years and

older. Also in this programming period the ESF funding targets people in society who are more vulnerable to

unemployment and social exclusion. 13% of the participants belong to one of the vulnerable groups (minorities,

migrants, disabled).

C. APPROACH

The research work for this study took place in various stages. First of all, the relevant measures from the 2000-2006

period were identifi ed by reading the titles of all ESF measures implemented in the 2000-2006 fi nancing period. In

instances where it was not possible to establish from the title whether a certain measure was relevant for this report

or not, the Programme Complement was consulted for more detailed information. The list with identifi ed relevant

measures is provided in Annex 3 to this report. The study covers activities where there is signifi cant involvement of

institutions of the tertiary education system, such as universities, research centres or higher education institutions.

Additionally, interventions aiming to reinforce cooperation and know-how transfer between business and tertiary

education establishments were taken into account. Measures relating only to secondary education or vocational

training were excluded for this report as they will be addressed elsewhere.

Introduction


Secondly, materials for the relevant measures were collected in the various ESF programming and implementation

documents. The qualitative information comes mainly from the Programme Complements which describe in detail

the planned interventions. The data are mainly based on tables of output and outcome indicators from the Annual

Implementation Reports. This was complemented with information from evaluations where necessary.

The third step consisted in processing the collected information. All indicators for the relevant measures were

collected, reviewed, standardised and, where necessary, aggregated or extrapolated to get a more comprehensive

picture. The results are presented in Chapter 2. It was necessary to standardise the indicators in order to obtain

results that are comparable across programmes and Member States. Further information on the standardisation

procedure can be found in Annex 4.

The fi gures on expenditure were gathered from the SFC (EC Structural Funds fi nancial database) which provides

fi nancial information for each measure. The fi gures given in the report refl ect the situation as at September 2008.

In the current programming period the budget of each OP gives an overview of the diff erent priority themes it

covers. For this study the relevant priority themes are:

Technology transfer and improvement of cooperation networks between small businesses, between these and ●

other businesses and universities, post-secondary education establishments of all kinds, regional authorities,

research centres and scientifi c and technological poles (priority theme 03)

Assistance to R&TD, particularly in SMEs (priority theme 04) ●

Other measures to stimulate research and innovation and entrepreneurship in SMEs (priority theme 04) ●

Developing human potential in the fi eld of research and innovation, in particular through post-graduate studies ●

and training of researchers, and networking activities between universities, research centres and businesses

(priority theme 74)

From among these priority themes number 74 is found in the most OPs and has by far the highest budget allocation.

Nevertheless all priority themes were used to identify the relevant OPs in the 2007-2013 period. A keyword search

was then done on English summaries of the relevant OPs to identify the priority axes that address the development

of human potential in research and innovation. The list with relevant priority axes is provided in Annex 5 to this

report. The budget fi gures are taken from the SFC 2007 which provides the fi nancial information for each priority

theme per OP. It refl ects the situation as at February 2009.

For both fi nancing periods the identifi cation of relevant information was done as thoroughly as possible in order

to provide a comprehensive report. Nevertheless, given the quantity and variety of source documents it is possible

that individually relevant activities might have been overlooked. However, the scope for mistakes should be fairly

small and hence any possible errors should not aff ect the overall picture presented in this report.

13Introduction

Chapter 1: Human potential in research and innovation - trends and challenges

A. THE EU’S POSITION IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION AND THE EUROPEAN POLICY FRAMEWORK

The industrial economy of the 20th century has developed into an information and knowledge-based economy.

This has profound implications for economic, social, cultural and political activities at local, regional, national,

European and global levels.

In the knowledge-based economy people are the central resource because knowledge is produced, stored and

applied by people. It does not mean that agriculture and industry are no longer important or that people are

nothing other than ‘carriers of knowledge’; it means that skills, competencies and capabilities of people become the

main precondition for and driver of growth and employment.

Analysis conducted by the OECD is more and more directed to understanding the relationship between the

knowledge-based economy and traditional economics. By the late 1990s the OECD already found that “investments

in research and development, education and training and new managerial work structures are the key”10 in order to

cope with the challenges of economic change. The report identifi es three pillars of the new economy:

Knowledge investments and knowledge distribution through formal and informal networks is essential to ●

economic performance;

Employment in the knowledge-based economy is characterised by an increasing demand for highly skilled ●

workers. Government policies will need to focus more on upgrading human capital through promoting access

to a range of skills and especially the capacity to learn;

Public research laboratories and institutes of higher education carry out key functions in the knowledge-based ●

economy, such as knowledge production, transmission and transfer.

Tertiary education is increasingly important because it is a crucial driving force in building up a knowledge-based

economy. Tertiary education contributes to social and economic development through four major missions11:

The formation of human capital (primarily through teaching); ●

The building of knowledge bases (primarily through research and knowledge development); ●

The dissemination and use of knowledge (primarily through interactions with knowledge users); and ●

The maintenance of knowledge (inter-generational storage and transmission of knowledge). ●

10. OECD, Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society (Paris: OECD, 2008) 7



Although not all Member States are in the same position, tertiary education systems have been remarkably

expanded. Globally, in 2004, 132 million students enrolled in tertiary education, compared to 68 million in 1991. The

average annual growth in tertiary enrolment over the period 1991 - 2004 stood at 5.1% worldwide12. Developments

in Europe since 2000 also confi rm this trend. In fact the growth rates in the number of graduates from tertiary

education in Europe are higher than in the US or Japan. In 2008 the European Commission report “A more research-

intensive and integrated European Research Area” stated that the proportion of the population with tertiary

education increased in all countries of the European Research Area13. Since 2000 more students graduated from

tertiary and doctoral studies in the EU than in the US and Japan and the increase in the number of tertiary and

doctoral graduates was much higher in the EU than in the US. In 2005, 100,000 doctoral degrees were awarded

in EU-27. In the US and Japan the number of doctoral degrees reached 53,000 and 15,000 respectively. Between

2000 and 2005 the number of graduates from tertiary education increased signifi cantly. In 2005 it was 3.8 million

in the EU-27 compared with 2.8 million in 2005. This means that on average the number of tertiary graduates has

increased by 5.9% per year since 2000.

‘Brain circulation’, ‘war of talents’, ‘business incubation’, ‘managing change’, ‘networking’ - these are some slogans for

the new economy and each of them is somehow related to knowledge. Knowledge developments happen in a

variety of settings. They are related to concrete challenges and tend to be interactive processes in which individuals

increase their knowledge by participating.

Knowledge14 itself is no longer reduced to ‘know what’ and ‘know why’ but extended to ‘know how’ and ‘know who’.

People learn the four kinds of knowledge through diff erent channels. While ‘know what’ and ‘know why’ is basically

tackled through information sources such as books, lectures and databases, the other two kinds of knowledge

are based on experience. ‘Know how’ for example is learned in situations where an apprentice follows his / her

instructor, and ‘know who’ in concrete social practice and new educational environments. New kinds of knowledge

need new forms of learning and education. This wide approach of learning is crucial for the tertiary sector as well:

Beside the specifi c know-how of the diff erent disciplines of science, social skills, networks and contacts become

more important.

However, the wide approach to learning is embedded in well established fi elds of action in the tertiary sector such

as research and innovation. To defi ne the theme of this study, it is necessary to clarify some terms and concepts. The

section below describes the most important concepts deployed in this report. The following general defi nitions are

based on the identifi ed concepts in the ESF framework and to a lesser extent on economic theories.

Research

In a wide sense ‘research’ includes any gathering of data, information and facts for the advancement of knowledge. This

study is not about research in the sense of methods used but about developments in the tertiary education system

and about cooperation models between research institutions, mainly universities, with business establishments.


13. European Commission, A more research-intensive and integrated European Research Area - Science, Technology and Competitiveness key fi gures

report 2008/2009 (Luxembourg, European Commission, 2008) 56-59

14. OECD, The knowledge-based economy (Paris: OECD, 1996) 12

15

Innovation

In general, innovation is about renewing and extending a given range of products and services, establishing new

methods of design, production, supply or distribution. Innovation in the sense applied for this study is about

innovative approaches to modernise the tertiary education system and new models of exploitation of knowledge

as well as new products and the creation of new companies.

Human potential and human capital

‘Improving the Human Research Potential and the Socio-economic Base’ is one of the individual programmes

within the European Commission’s 5th Framework Programme15. In this programme human potential initiatives

aim to support the training and mobility of researchers from virtually all scientifi c fi elds throughout Europe and to

increase expertise in the socio-economic sciences to understand how to harness Europe’s rapidly changing society.

In the 2000-2006 ESF programmes only a few Member States used the term ‘human potential’ in their Programme

Complements, but several Member States implemented activities in the area of research and innovation without

using the term “human potential” as such. The Spanish programmes mainly used the term “human capital”16.

In the ESF programming period 2007-2013 the term ‘human capital’ becomes a new priority and is seen to reinforce

and widen the “human potential” approach17. The OECD defi nes it as “the knowledge, skills, competence and other

attributes embodied in individuals that are relevant to economic activity”18. However, the focus on the crucial

role that human capital plays is in no way intended to imply that all forms of education and learning should be

directed to economic ends: “Human capital has been identifi ed as one key factor in combating high and persistent

unemployment and the problems of low pay and poverty”19.

For the purposes of this study, both terms, “human potential” and “human capital”, in relation to research and

innovation, are equally important. Diff erences between programmes or Member States are evident from the

contents of diff erent measures, rather than from the title used.

The EU’s position worldwide

The EU is one of the world’s largest ‘producers’ of scientifi c knowledge. As Table 1 shows, in the EU-1520, about

970,000 researchers were employed in the year 2000. This number has shown an average annual growth rate of

3.9 % since 1996 compared to 4.28% in the US. Whereas in the EU-15 about 50% of researchers are employed by the

private sector, this share increases to about 64% for Japan and about 80% for the US. In the period 2000-2006 the


15. See Website of the European Commission about the CORDIS programme: <cordis.europa.eu/improving/code/about.htm>

16. E.g. 2000ES161PO003, Programme Complement, Andalucia, Spain, Provide support for the investment in human capital in the fi elds of research,

science and technology, and the same measure in 14 other Spanish regions.

17. A dedicated chapter on human capital, technology and growth is Chapter 4 of the report Employment in Europe 2006: <http://ec.europa.eu/

employment_social/employment_analysis/eie/eie2006_chap4_en.pdf> or in European Commission, Human Capital in a global and knowledge-

based economy, Luxembourg: European Commission, 2003; The human capital concept is valued from the European Council as well: Council

Conclusions 25 November 2003 on the Development of human capital for social cohesion and competitiveness in the knowledge society, Offi cial

Journal of the European Union. C 295/9

18. OECD, Human Capital Investment, An international Comparison (Paris: OECD, 1998) 9

19. OECD, Human Capital Investment, An international Comparison (Paris: OECD, 1998) 3

20. EU-15 refers to the 15 EU Member States before the fi fth enlargement in 2004: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy,

Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and the UK.


EU-27 showed a 3.1% increase in researchers per year. Consequently in 2006 there were 1.33 million researchers in

EU-27 compared to 1.39 million in the US and 1.22 million in China. On average the number of researchers in the EU

has increased twice as much as in the US and in Japan since 2000.21

Table 1: Researchers - total numbers and by sector (%), 2001

in % by sectorTotal number of

researchers

Average annual

growth rates in %

1996-20012Business enterprise Government Higher education

BE 54.5 4.0 40.4 30,219 7.28

DK 47.9 20.7 30.2 18,944 4.30

DE 59.3 14.4 26.3 259,597 2.43

GR 15.2 13.6 71.0 14,748 11.03

ES 23.7 16.7 58.6 80,081 9.17

FR 47.1 15.2 35.8 172,070 2.67

IE 66.1 8.7 25.2 8,516 7.32

IT 39.5 21.7 38.9 66,110 - 3.56

NL 47.6 14.1 37.2 42,085 5.11

AT 62.6 5.1 31.8 18,715 7.86

PTl 15.5 21.0 50.3 17,584 6.55

FI 56.9 12.3 29.8 36,889 8.64

SE 60.6 4.9 34.5 45,995 5.68

UK 57.9 9.1 31.1 157,662 4.37

EU-153 49.7 13.4 34.5 972,448 3,90

CY - - - 333 12.08

CZ 38.4 32.3 28.4 14,987 2.94

EE - - - 2,681 - 3.44

HU 27.8 31.8 40.5 14,666 7.10

LT - - - 8,075 1.40

LV - - - 3,497 4.26

PL 16.9 18.7 64.3 56,919 1.64

SI 33.6 32.3 30.7 4,498 0.04

SK 23.5 25.4 51.0 9,585 - 0.86

EU-253 47.3 14.5 36.0 1,084,726 3.68

BG - - - 9,217 - 8.98

RO 57.2 28.4 14.4 19,726 - 8.23

TR 16.0 10.7 73.2 23,083 6.28

IS 45.9 22.8 27.7 1,859 8.52

NO 55.7 15.6 28.7 19,752 3.09

CH 62.9 1.6 35.5 25,755 4.45

US 80.5 3.8 14.7 1,261,227 4.28

JP 63.7 5.0 29.6 675,898 1.83

Source: DG Research. Key Figures 2003-2004

Data: OECD, MSTI 2003/Vol.1, for non-OECD members: Eurostat/Member State

Note: The sectors do not add up to 100%

(1) or latest available year: AT, UK: 1998, BE, DK, GR,US: 1999; FR, IE, IT, NL, EU-15, EU-25, TR, CH: 2000; (2) or nearest available years: AT: 1993-1998, GR 1995-

1999, US: 1997-1999; BE, DK: 1996-1999; FR, IE, IT, NL, EU-15, EU-25, TR, CH: 1996-2000; PT, FI, SE, IS, NO: 1997-2001; CY, EE: 1998-2001; (3) EU-15, EU-25 data are

estimated by Directorate-General for Research and total numbers do not include LU or MT. EU-25 by sector data exclude LU, CY, EE, LT, LV and MT.

21. European Commission A more research-intensive and integrated European Research Area - Science, Technology and Competitiveness key fi gures

report 2008/2009 (Luxembourg, 2008) 51: <http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/pdf/key-fi gures-report2008-2009_en.pdf

17

However, Europe lags behind the US in all scientifi c disciplines in terms of citation impact scores and highly-cited

publications and is underrepresented at the top of a ranking of the world’s largest universities22. Additionally,

compared to the US, the average university in the EU generates far fewer inventions and patents.

Europe has a diffi culty in breaking through in new high-tech industries. Moreover, effi cient knowledge transfer

in European research institutions is hindered by a range of factors, including cultural diff erences between the

business and science communities, lack of incentives, legal barriers, and fragmented markets for knowledge and

technology23.

European institutions and individual Member States are attempting to fi nd strategies to overcome the obstacles and

improve the exploitation of knowledge. The European Commission itself sets out three main directions for change24:

Attractive programmes and profound curricular reform, with more diff erentiation; ●

Better system and institutional management (or ‘governance’); ●

Higher and more effi cient funding. ●

One crucial point to unleash the potential of universities and research institutions is effi cient funding. “Research &

Development” intensity in Europe has stagnated since the mid-nineties. Japan, China and South Korea for instance

have been able to increase their R&D eff orts substantially. In particular, the low level of business R&D shows the

diff erences in the industrial structure. “The total (public and private) investment in higher education in the EU in

2001 was 1.3% of GDP, compared to 2.5% in Canada and 2.8% in the US. To close the spending gap with the US, the

EU would have to commit an additional € 140 billion per year”25.

As Figure 10 shows four years later in 2005 only 1.84% of GDP was spent on R&D in the EU-27 and it remained at

a lower level than in the US, Japan or South Korea26. In 2005 the two highest-spending EU Member States were

Sweden (3.86%) and Finland (3.43%). Considering the needs of additional fi nance and the limits on public budgets

the contribution from the private sector to the fi nancing of R&D is crucial for new developments. In 2005, the

business sector fi nanced 54.5% of R&D expenditure in the EU-27. Government accounted for slightly more than

one-third of the Union’s R&D spending27. While there were minor changes for individual Member States one year

later, the EU’s overall R&D expenditure had not changed and was still at 1.84% in 2006.28

These fi gures provide evidence that the EU needs to invest more in R&D in order to stay competitive on a global

level. The EU has therefore set itself the Barcelona Objective of spending 3% of the GDP on research in order to keep

the European Union on target to becoming the world’s most dynamic knowledge-based economy.


22. Press release Brussels 11 June 2007, Reference IP/07/790, Low business R&D a major threat to the European knowledge-based economy, or link to

the report <http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/monitoring/statistical01_en.htm>

23. M1/FM-DD D(2006), Report on the outcomes of the: Public consultation on transnational research cooperation and knowledge transfer between pub-

lic research organisations and industry, Brussels, 1 September 2006 <http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/consult_report.pdf>

24. COM (2005) 152 Final, Mobilising the brainpower of Europe: enabling universities to make their full contribution to the Lisbon Strategy, Brussels, 20

April 2005.

25. Centro de Estudios en Gestión de la Educación Superior, Rates of return and funding models in Europe (Valencia: CEGES, 2007)

26. European Commission DG Research: Key Figures 2007 Towards a European Research Area Science, Technology and Innovation, Brussels: 2007, p. 59

27. European Commission DG Research: Key Figures 2007 Towards a European Research Area Science, Technology and Innovation” p. 61: “The shares

of domestic R&D expenditure fi nanced from private and public sources are subject to a certain margin of error, due to the non-availability of a

breakdown between private and public sources in the category “funded from abroad”




Figure 9: R&D intensity (Government Expenditure on R&D as % of GDP), 20051

ROCYBG

BEEU-27

AU

CZNOLU

DEIS

CH

DK

ESSI

HR

FI

FR

GRTR

HUEE

IE

IT

LT

MTLVPL

PT

SEIL

SK

UKNL

0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0

Source: DG Research. Key Figures 2007 - Data: Eurostat/OECD - Note: (1) IT, NL, RO, UK, HR, TR, IS, CH: 2004; AT, FI: 2006

The contribution of the Structural Funds

By supporting activities in the area of research and innovation the Structural Funds, including the ESF, are making

an important contribution towards this goal. This is particularly true for the new Member States where national

spending on research and innovation is generally rather low. As Figure 10 shows government expenditure on R&D

19

is on average much lower in the new Member States. This means that the Structural Funds are one of the most

important sources of funding for research and innovation. In the Baltic Member States for example R&D expenditure

grew in real terms by over 100% between 2000 and 2006 and EU Cohesion Policy made a substantial contribution

to this. It is estimated that on average a quarter of total national R&D expenditure came from the Structural Funds in

the Baltic Member States.29 This trend also continues into the new programming period. According to the latest key

fi gures report on science, technology and competitiveness published by DG Research in 2008, the Structural Funds

allocated for research, technology, development and innovation to the 12 new Member States in 2007-2013 will be

€20.6 billion of which €4.8 billion is dedicated to research and technology infrastructures.30 Although this includes

funding from Structural Funds other than ESF, and only a part of the funding will be addressed to employment and

human potential in research and innovation, it is nevertheless fair to conclude that the Structural Funds, including

the ESF, play a crucial role in developing research and innovation in the new Member States. As regards ESF, the aim

is not to fi nance research and innovation directly, but rather to contribute to the development of human potential,

that is well-qualifi ed human resources, who can work in the sector of research and innovation.

EU policy initiatives

The 2008 Spring European Council confi rmed investment in knowledge and innovation as priority areas for the

renewed Lisbon Strategy31: “Member States and the European Union must remove barriers to the free movement

of knowledge by creating a ‘fi fth freedom’” in addition to the existing free movement of goods, persons, services

and capital. The links between education - research - innovation and the cooperation between universities and the

business community must be constantly intensifi ed. Signifi cant eff orts are underway or planned to foster the EU

economy towards more knowledge-intensive activities. This includes initiatives to strengthen the single market,

increase job mobility, reinforce education and training and extend investments in research and innovation.

At the Lisbon European Council in March 200032, the European Union set a new strategic goal for 2010, which was

“to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable

economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”. The focus shifted from the reduction of

unemployment to regaining the conditions of full employment, which is also one important aspect of the ‘Lisbon

Strategy’. The Lisbon Summit also recommended new or strengthened priorities (for example skills and mobility,

lifelong learning), which were refl ected in the Employment Guidelines for 2001 through new horizontal objectives.

In November 2004, the so-called Kok report “Facing the challenge: The Lisbon strategy for growth and employment”33

pointed out fi ve areas of policy: the need for interconnected initiatives in the knowledge society, the internal market,

the business climate, the labour market and environmental sustainability. Structural changes and the corresponding






31. Presidency Conclusions European Council 13-14 March 2008: <http://www.eu2008.si/si/>

32. European Commission Growth and Jobs page: <http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/index_en.htm>

33. European Communities, Facing the challenge: The Lisbon strategy for growth and employment, Luxembourg: European Communities, 2004:

<http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/kok_report_en.pdf>


actions should - alongside other initiatives - increase Europe’s attractiveness for researchers and scientists, make

R&D a top priority and promote the use of ICT. Other priorities concerned facilitating start-ups of new enterprises

and developing strategies for lifelong learning.

In March 2005, the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs (2005-2008)34 became part of a package of 24

guidelines of the Lisbon Strategy. The Guidelines were presented in conjunction with the macroeconomic and

microeconomic guidelines and for a period of three years. In particular, the following guidelines coincide with the

theme of this study:

Guideline 7: To increase and improve investment in R&D, in particular by private business; ●

Guideline 8: To facilitate all forms of innovation; ●

Guideline 23: To expand and improve investment in human capital. ●

At the start of the 21st century, the European labour market needs reform to adapt to globalisation, to react to

the changing demography and to foster rapid technological progress. The aim of the EU’s “fl exicurity approach”35

is to help face the challenges of a globalised and rapidly changing world. Flexicurity is a policy that promotes a

combination of fl exible labour markets, work organisation and labour relations and a high level of employment

and income security. It involves moving from a ‘job security’ mentality to an ‘employment/employability security’

mentality. Flexicurity is equally important in the fi eld of research, science and technology development for the

institutions of the tertiary education sector, for students and researchers as well as companies working in the

fi eld. Professional career planning is changing and graduates as well as academics expect more and more project-

oriented short-term contracts rather than permanent and long-term jobs. Companies on the other hand use new

management concepts such as corporate culture asset, operate in environments that are more dynamic than

ever before and turn innovation into a continuous process. Therefore the requirements for highly qualifi ed staff

rise constantly. Companies try more and more to engage experts and expertise on a fl exible basis and for special

objectives and solutions. One of these new concepts is “relationship recruitment” where companies build up a

network of experts who can work at short notice when needed. Consequently fl exibility and mobility have become

crucial for the majority of people working in the sector of research and innovation.

In its 2005 Communication “More Research and Innovation - Investing for Growth and Employment”36 the European

Commission emphasised the need for the European Union to ensure a favourable regulatory environment for

research and innovation. Harmonisation of all policies at national and Community levels needs to be encouraged

in order to support research and innovation. Lack of research collaboration and knowledge transfer between public

research organisations, particularly universities, and industry is evident. Research and innovation contribute to the

growth and wealth of businesses and in particular when they form clusters or networks. In order to bring research

and industry permanently closer in this way, various initiatives should be encouraged at both European and Member

State levels such as intensifi ed university - industry partnerships, innovation poles, research-driven and industrial

clusters and regions of knowledge will support cooperation between the systems37.

34. European Communities, Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs (2005-2008), Luxembourg: European Communities, 2005: <http://ec.europa.

eu/growthandjobs/pdf/integrated_guidelines_en.pdf>

35. <http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=102&langId=en>

36. COM (2005) 488, More Research and Innovation - Investing for Growth and Employment: A Common Approach, Brussels, 28 February 2005.

37. COM (2007) 449, Improving knowledge transfer between research institutions and industry across Europe: embracing open innovation, Brussels,

4 April 2007

21

Research infrastructure38 and support programmes39 are essential to research and innovation. It is thus important

that this area receives suffi cient public funding at all levels. Similarly, better use should be made of public support

mechanisms as an incentive for private investment, e.g. grants, equity instruments, guarantee schemes and other

risk-sharing mechanisms. To this end, several instruments have already been put in place:

the Seventh Research Framework Programme (FP7) ● 40;

the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) ● 41;

the Structural Funds, including the ESF; ●

other complementary instruments, each with its specifi c form of governance. ●

The European Research Area

Initiatives to stimulate this are summarised under the overall governance of the European Research Area (ERA)42.

In 2007 the Commission launched a public consultation on the ERA Green Paper. Whilst the initial focus was on

how to improve the effi ciency and eff ectiveness of fragmented research eff orts, the scope is now broadened.

Further activities are necessary on all levels. The new initiatives address researchers´ careers and mobility, research

infrastructures, knowledge sharing, research programmes and international sciences and technology cooperation

with the aim to establish lasting partnerships with the Member States and stakeholders.43

The ERA Green Paper points out six axes in order that the ERA might become a reality:

realising a single labour market for researchers; ●

developing world class infrastructures; ●

strengthening research institutions; ●

sharing knowledge; ●

optimising research programmes and priorities; ●

opening to the world: international cooperation in science and technology. ● 44

It highlights the importance of networking national research programmes and the value of coordinated and

targeted EU research projects and infrastructure and also stresses the central role of human resources, i.e. researcher

mobility issues, women and science, young talents and researchers from third Member States.

The Council of the European Union and the European Commission have decided to enhance the overall governance

of the ERA, as specifi ed in the ‘Ljubljana Process’ in May 200845. The long-term vision is to make Europe a leading

knowledge economy and society based on the ‘knowledge triangle’ of research, innovation and education. The

vision includes the free movement of knowledge, the ‘fi fth freedom’, with excellent training and attractive career


38. See European Commission’s initiatives and the proposal for a Council Regulation in COM 2008 467, Community legal framework for a European

Research Infrastructure (ERI), Brussels, 25 July 2008.

39. COM 2008 468, Towards joint programming in research: working together to tackle common challenges more eff ectively, 15 July 2008

40. <http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html>

41. <http://ec.europa.eu/cip/index_en.htm>

42. In its founding document of the year 2000 it cites several concrete challenges it aims to meet. These include better use of scientifi c resources and

facilities at the European level, more dynamic private investment in R&D, increased human resources and researcher mobility, as well as providing

conditions more conducive for a research area of ‘shared values’; see the Website: <http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/index_en.html>

43. COM (2007) 161, Green Paper: The European Research Area: New Perspectives, Brussels, 4 April 2007



45. Council Conclusions on the launch of the “Ljubljana Process” - towards full realization of the ERA, 16 May 2008


prospects for researchers moving and interacting freely across Europe. The European Research Area (ERA) has become

a key reference for research policy in Europe. The ERA inspires the best talent to enter research careers in Europe,

encourages industry to invest more in European research - thereby contributing to the EU objective to devote 3%

of GDP for research, and signifi cantly supports the creation of sustainable growth and jobs. The ERA combines a

“European internal market” for research, where researchers, technology and knowledge freely circulate46.

B. TOPICS ADDRESSED THROUGH ESF

The next section will give an overview of the background and policies of a number of topics which are addressed

through the ESF in order to promote human potential in research and innovation.

Tertiary education

Higher education is situated at the crossroads of research, education and innovation. An important element of

EU higher education policy is the so-called ‘Bologna Process’, which aims to “create by 2010 a European Higher

Education Area in which students can choose from a wide and transparent range of high quality courses and

benefi t from smooth recognition procedures”47. The Bologna Declaration of June 199948 has put in motion a series

of reforms needed to make European higher education more compatible and comparable, more competitive and

more attractive. The introduction of the three cycle system (Bachelor / Master / Doctorate), quality assurance and

recognition of qualifi cations and periods of study are the three pillars of the strategy.

In May 2005 the European Education Council emphasised the importance of higher education and research and the

need to improve the synergy between the higher education sector and other research sectors49. Doctoral education

and the so-called third cycle, doctoral training through original research, interdisciplinary training, transferable skills,

mobility of students and staff remain the key objectives of higher education.

Since 2005 a key priority for the EU is the European Qualifi cations Framework (EQF)50. The objective of the EQF is to

facilitate the transfer and recognition of qualifi cations held by individual citizens, by linking qualifi cations systems at

the national and sectoral levels and enabling them to relate to each other. The EQF will therefore act as a translation

device and will be one of the principal European mechanisms intended to facilitate citizen mobility for work and

study, alongside for example Erasmus, the European Credit Transfer System and Europass.

46. COM (2007) 161 fi nal, Green Paper The European Research Area: new Perspectives, 4 April 2007

47. Website of European Commission about the Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area, EHEA: <http://ec.europa.eu/education/

policies/educ/bologna/bologna_en.html>

48. <http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/990719BOLOGNA_DECLARATION.PDF>

49. Bergen Communiqué of the Conference of the European Education Council, 19-20 May 2005

50. <http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc44_en.htm>

23

In parallel, individual Member States have also taken action on organisational, infrastructural and fi nancial level. In

Finland reform initiatives are currently underway in order to increase the autonomy of universities vis-à-vis the state

and to make them more independent legally and fi nancially51. To raise budgets for tertiary education Germany

allowed 2005 the federal states to charge tuition fees of up to € 1,000 a year. In addition Germany promotes “elite

universities” by encouraging them to compete for money. The United Kingdom has introduced tuition fees of up

to £ 3,300 a year for England and Wales. In France, where generally no tuition fees are paid, students compete for

places at the elite, fee-paying business schools. These examples from diff erent Member States show that changes

are multifaceted and the reform initiatives within the sector are profound.

Raising the skills profi le

All manner of goods and services can be produced more cheaply in emerging economies, which increasingly

have access to advanced technology. Low-cost competition is no strategy for European countries. Companies who

want to succeed in the long term will therefore compete on the basis of quality, design, personalised services and

effi ciency of delivery. For quality products and services the contribution of the people who produce or provide them,

the knowledge they have and the personal attitude they bring to delivery is crucial. Generally, raising the skills profi le

promotes a culture where people demand skills and qualifi cations because they recognise the social and economic

benefi ts that they bring. More concrete and adapted to the topic of the report, raising the skills profi le cover especially

initiatives such as meeting the needs of learners, improving teaching and learning, spreading success and eliminating

failures.52 Defi cits in available skills are limiting the ability to compete, to innovate, and, ultimately, to grow.

Mobility in research and innovation and international cooperation

Despite the progress made at national and European levels, mobility remains a source of uncertainty among researchers,

especially from the legal, administrative and informational points of view. A further challenge to the European Union

is to provide better careers and facilitate more mobility of researchers. In this connection, the aim is to create an

open and competitive European labour market. The Communication “Better careers and more mobility: A European

partnership for researchers” which the European Commission published in 2008 outlines how a wide partnership

of Member States can contribute to the availability of researchers needed in the EU. In order to achieve measurable

progress, open recruitment, adaptation to social security and supplementary pension needs of mobile researchers,

attractive working conditions and enhanced training are important targets53. Another very useful tool is the newly

established database EURAXESS54 to support researchers who are interested in moving to another Member State.


51. See Finnish Ministry of Education: <http://www.minedu.fi /OPM/Koulutus/yliopistokoulutus/?lang=en>

52. The term “raising skills” is based on the English report “Further education: Raising skill, improving Life Chances” (Update: July 2007): Department

for Innovation, Universities and Skills. Originally the British government received a report about the UK´s skills needs to 2020 (Leitch Review of Skills

Final Report: Prosperity for all in the global economy - world class skills, HM-Treasury, December 2006) and it was about the crucial role of the

further education sector.

53. COM (2008) 317, Better careers and more mobility: A European partnership for researchers, Brussels: 23 May 2008

54. <http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index_en.cfm>


Access to higher education for all and equal opportunities

The Action Plan “Investing in Research”55 of the European Commission “focuses on the need to expand and improve

human resources, to strengthen the public research base and to enhance the eff ectiveness of the various public

fi nancing instruments”. One important objective is to attract more students to research, in particular women, and to

facilitate the opening-up of national systems for recruitment and off er favourable career development prospects.

Although the number of researchers in Europe has increased by 3.1% between 2000 and 2006, the EU remains less

“researcher-intensive” than the US and Japan. It is therefore crucial to facilitate the access to tertiary education for all

in order to raise the number of researchers.56

Cooperation and know-how transfer between research institutes and the busi-ness sector

One of Europe’s main challenges in the sector of research and innovation is to reduce the gap between the needs

of the economy and work of the scientifi c community. In the EU’s broad-based innovation strategy, improving the

transfer of knowledge between public research institutions and third parties, including industry, was identifi ed as

one of ten key areas for action57.

The European universities have enormous potential with 4,000 institutions, over 17 million students and some 1.5

million staff , including 435,000 researchers58. Therefore, one of the main targets of the EU is to facilitate cooperation

between systems, institutions and companies. Interaction between diff erent stakeholders is encouraged at both

macroeconomic and microeconomic levels. In diff erent communications and through various programmes the

European Commission has promoted research-business cooperation and know-how transfer. The Communication of

the European Commission “The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge”59 declares that the need for global

competitiveness demands that knowledge fl ows from universities into business and society. In recent years, the EU

has also invested a major eff ort in setting up a useful and supportive framework to promote cooperation. For example,

the voluntary guidelines for universities and other research institutions intend to highlight good practices regarding

the management and transfer of knowledge60. Numerous initiatives have been taken by Member States to promote

collaboration between the world of research and the world of business. This is also refl ected in their National Reform

Programmes, which cover the Member States reform programmes and implementation reports to achieve the Lisbon

Strategy for Growth and Jobs61. The process of knowledge transfer itself involves processes to capture, collect and

share explicit and tacit knowledge, including skills and competences, the “know what” and the “know how”.

55. COM (2003) 226 fi nal, Investing in research: an action plan for Europe, Brussels, 30 April 2003

56. “A glimpse at the European Research Area”: <http://eu-research.blogspot.com/2009/02/number-of-researchers-by-world-region.html>

57. COM (2006) 502, Putting knowledge into practice: A broad-based innovation strategy for the EU, Brussels, 13 September 2006

58. COM (2006) 208, Delivering on the modernization agenda for universities: education, research and innovation, Brussels, 10 May 2006.

59. COM (2003) 58, The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge, Brussels, 5 February 2003.

60. SEC (2007) 449, The Voluntary guidelines for universities and other research institutions to improve their links with industry across Europe, Brussels,

4 April 2007 is an accompanying document to the European Commission Communication COM (2007) 182, Improving knowledge transfer

between research institutions and industry across Europe: embracing open innovation, Brussels, 4 April 2007; another important example of the

European framework is the COM (2005) 576 , European Commission recommendation on the European Charter for Researchers and on a Code of

Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers, Brussels, 11 March 2005

61. See the Action Plans and updated Reform Programmes (2008-2010) on the Website of European Commission: <http://ec.europa.eu/

growthandjobs/national-dimension/member-states-2008-2010-reports/index_en.htm>

25Chapter 1: Human potential in research and innovation - trends and challenges

Another initiative in this area is the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)62. The EIT refers to this

cooperation as ‘Knowledge and Innovation Communities’ or KICs63 and reports on many successful models of

know-how transfer to companies: KICs are described as excellence-driven partnerships between universities,

research organisations, companies and other innovation stakeholders. They are aimed at promoting the

production, dissemination and exploitation of new knowledge products and best practices in the innovation

sector, and transforming the outcomes of higher education and research activities into commercially exploitable

innovation. The inclusion of both the business and higher education dimensions is obligatory in order to ensure

a constant focus on delivering and disseminating usable outcomes. The benefi ts for participating research and

education organisations include the prestige and visibility of the EIT and an increased capacity to attract the best

possible students.

Many companies are also developing new models of cooperation such as “open innovation”, which combines in-

house resources with time limited, external resources. The needs of the economy are diverse and include support

in the areas of design, process improvement and equipment performance. They also rely on processes to yield and

explore products which already exist or new products which meet new customer needs. However, in the EU one of

the main challenges in the development of new products is the high cost of patents. For new patent applications

SMEs have to pay more than 20 times more than in the US and for maintaining the patent protection the costs are

over 60 times higher than in the US.64

Employment through cooperation

In addition to the benefi ts of knowledge transfer itself, cooperation between the economy and academic

institutions also safeguards and creates jobs. Ultimately the main objective of the ESF is the promotion of

employment. Researchers and scientists generally work in areas which are dependent on cooperation and thus

the number of newly created jobs is an indication of the success of cooperation. Even though these jobs are

not always permanent they often serve as an entry point into the labour market on the way to a permanent

contract. The experience of working on innovative projects involving both the academic and the business sector

is an advantage in the career of any researcher. Such professional experience does not only lead to specifi c

professional and personal skills, but also to social competences in cooperating within an interdisciplinary team.

Overall employment in knowledge-intensive services is especially prominent in the Nordic Member States, the

United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Luxembourg where, in 2006, it made up over 40% of total employment.

The average for EU-27 stood at 32.9%.65

62. Council Regulation (EC) No 294/2008 establishing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology

63. See offi cial Website of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology: <ec.europa.eu/eit/h_kics_en.htm>






Competence centres and high-tech cooperation

Cooperation and know-how transfer is organised diff erently across Member States. The concentration of know-

how in so-called ‘competence centres’ or in ‘networking projects’ is an interesting approach. The way competence

centres are set up and fi nanced diff ers from country to country. Initially, management, organisation and budget of

“competence centres” were a widespread and nationally formed concept.

In general, “competence centres” can be grouped according to the initiators such as universities, joint research

programmes or national agencies. The University of Applied Science in Berlin (FHTW) ran a number of

interdisciplinary competence centres66. They were established in order to combine the research and development

capacities of various departments and study programmes. Competence centres can have any number of university

members. They have their own small budgets that make it possible to develop collaborative projects, which usually

have a prerequisite for acquiring third-party funding. Another example is the Austrian initiative of “Competence

Centres for Excellent Technologies (COMET)”, which is the competence centre programme established in 2007. It

aims to intensify and concentrate cooperation between science and industry. By establishing and exploiting joint

research expertise, Austrian companies have been facilitated to expand and secure their technological leadership,

thereby strengthening Austria as a research location. The programme’s task is to support research programmes of

international excellence, and to encourage the involvement of companies and scientists operating world-wide.

The programme addresses existing competence centres and networks, as well as new consortia with participants

from science and industry67. A third example is the work of “Enterprise Ireland”, which is the government agency

responsible for the development and promotion of the indigenous business sector. The mission of the agency is to

accelerate the development of world-class Irish companies to achieve strong positions in global markets resulting

in increased national and regional prosperity. One specifi c objective was to establish the “Competence Centre

initiative” and to achieve competitive advantage for industry in Ireland by accessing the innovative capacity of

the research community68. Additionally, there were numerous Competence Centres established and run by the

companies themselves with ESF funding.

C. RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN THE ESF REGULATIONS

In the ESF regulations there are several references to research and innovation which provide the basis for activities

in this fi eld.

1. ESF-Programming Period 2000-2006 This report is based on Article 2.1 (d) of the ESF Regulation of the programming period 2000 - 200669:

“Promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce, innovation and adaptability in work organisations, developing

entrepreneurship and conditions facilitating job creation, and enhancing skills and boosting human potential in

research, science and technology”.

66. For more information see : <http://www-en.htw-berlin.de/research/competence_centres.html>

67. For more information see : <http://www.era.gv.at/space/11442/directory/11857.html>

68. For more information see : <http://www.enterprise-ireland.com/CompetenceCentres/default.htm>

69. Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999

27Chapter 1: Human potential in research and innovation - trends and challenges

The regulation states that fi nancial support from the ESF shall mainly take the form of:

“assistance to persons [...] in the fi elds of research, science and technology development, post-graduate training ●

and the training of managers and technicians at research establishments and in enterprises”70; and

“assistance to structures and systems [...] (through) the development of links between the worlds of work and ●

education, training, and research establishments”71.

The development of human potential in research and innovation was considered to be a substantial contribution

to a highly skilled workforce. Member States organised a variety of activities to tackle this challenge. Assistance to

persons covered essentially interventions to increase the number of graduates in tertiary education and enhance

their skills, particularly in the fi eld of research and technological development, and support to obtain employment

and self-employment. For structures and systems, aid was provided to improve the quality of training and education,

to foster the co-operation between science and business and to raise effi ciency. The modernisation of the tertiary

education system is based on links between the world of work and education and training establishments to foster

systems for forward planning and anticipation of change as well as technology transfer.

2. ESF-Programming Period 2007-2013 In the ESF programming period 2007-2013 the original term ‘human potential’ has been substituted by the term

‘human capital’. At the same time research and innovation gained in importance. Within the framework of the

Convergence and Regional competitiveness and employment strategies, the ESF shall support activities to enhance

human capital, in particular by promoting72:

“the design and introduction of reforms in education and training systems in order to develop employability, ●

the improvement of the labour market relevance of initial and vocational education and training and continual

updating of the skills of training personnel with a view to innovation and a knowledge based economy;

networking activities between higher education institutions, research and technological centres and ●

enterprises.”

Within the framework of the Convergence objective the ESF shall support actions which help Member States in

expanding and improving investment in human capital, especially through73:

“the implementation of reforms in education and training systems, especially with a view to raising people’s ●

responsiveness to the needs of a knowledge-based society and lifelong learning;

increased participation in education and training throughout the life-cycle, including through actions aiming to ●

achieve a reduction in early school leaving and in gender-based segregation of subjects and increased access

to and quality of initial, vocational and tertiary education and training;

the development of human capital in research and innovation, notably through post-graduate studies and the ●

training of researchers.”

70. Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999, Article 3.1.c

71. Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999, Article 3.2.a.(iii)

72. Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006, Article 3.1.d

73. Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006, Article 3.2.a


In the current programming period the investment in human capital will be reinforced by focusing on the Lisbon

objectives in line with the integrated guidelines for growth and employment74: “The drive for full employment

and higher productivity depends on a wide variety of actions. To maximise employment and create high quality

permanent jobs from necessary investments, human capital should be further developed and enhanced”. One

guideline specifi cally highlights “more and better jobs” and identifi es three main priorities for Member State

policies:

“Attract and retain more people in employment and modernise social protection systems; ●

Improve adaptability of workers and enterprises and the fl exibility of the labour market; ●

Increase investment in human capital through better education and skills.” ●

Investment in human capital is wide and covers actions for all ages. Its aim is to contribute to developing and

implementing eff ective national lifelong learning strategies for the benefi t of individuals, enterprises, the economy

and society. There are two priorities especially set up for tertiary education75:

“Strengthening the links between universities, research and technological centres and enterprises, in particular ●

through networking activities and joint actions;

Supporting the modernisation of tertiary education and the development of human potential in research and ●

innovation, through post-graduate studies, further training of researchers, and attracting more young people

into scientifi c and technical studies.”

74. Council Decision on Community strategic guidelines on cohesion, OJ L291, 6 October 2006, 23

75. Council Decision on Community strategic guidelines on cohesion, OJ L291, 6 October 2006, 26

29Chapter 2: ESF interventions and achievements on human potential in research and innovation

Chapter 2: ESF interventions and achievements on human potential in research and innovation

A. HUMAN POTENTIAL IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION AS A TARGET OF ESF SUPPORT

This chapter provides a description of the interventions and achievements of ESF supported programmes

across Europe in the fi eld of developing human potential in research and innovation. The chapter is based on

the quantitative fi ndings as reported by the Member States in the implementation reports and evaluations of the

2000-2006 period76. Member States always reported comprehensively on fi nancial data, which means how much

money was spent on a given topic in a given region, how much of this was provided by the ESF and how much

was national or private co-fi nancing. However, apart from that Member States also presented physical indicators.

The most common ones are how many people or fi rms and organisations benefi ted or how many projects were

implemented. In some cases a lot of information is available, including for example a breakdown by gender, age,

professional status, educational level etc. of the benefi ciaries and in other cases less information is given. The broad

range and diversity of indicators used by diff erent Member States sometimes makes a comparison between all

Member States diffi cult. In these cases only those Member States that did use comparable categories of indicators are

presented. In addition examples are used to illustrate the way in which the ESF interacted with and complemented

national actions in response to the theme.

Section B gives an overview of the general fi ndings regarding the achievements of the ESF to boost human potential

in research and innovation in the period 2000-2006. The topic is then further broken down into two sub-themes:

tertiary education on the one hand and cooperation and transfer of knowledge between research institutions and

the business sector on the other. Section C focuses, more specifi cally, on developments in tertiary education and

includes in particular a focus on how diff erent people such as students, researchers or scientists benefi ted from

the ESF. In addition Section C also outlines to what extent structures and systems benefi ted, and how the tertiary

education sector was improved. In the context of improving the tertiary education system the Member States

covered the following objectives:

Raising the skills profi le of all professionals working in research institutions and increasing the research capacity; ●

Increasing mobility of researchers; ●

Improving access to higher education for everyone and promoting equal opportunities. ●

76. For Austria and Denmark all fi gures of physical indicators are likely to be overestimates. For most of the OPs of these two Member States data was

only available at the priority level which means that the data represent the whole priority and not only the relevant measures as for the other

Member States.


The focus of section D is on cooperation between universities and the private sector and transfer of knowledge

from universities to companies. The section demonstrates achievements in the areas of:

Improving employment through cooperation; ●

Know-how transfer to companies and innovation; ●

Competence centres and high-tech cooperation. ●

Finally section E provides an overview of the new fi nancing period (2007-2013) and how the topic of human

potential in research and innovation is currently being addressed.

B. GENERAL FINDINGS: ESF FUNDING AND BENEFICIARIES

1. ESF funding in fi guresESF funding contributed signifi cantly to the development of human potential in research and innovation. Member

States implemented a wide range of interventions which address both individuals and systems. Table 2 shows the

actual expenditure of the ESF as well as national and private co-funding of the Member States and the relevant

number of measures which targeted human potential in research and innovation.

Table 2: Research and Innovation in Member States 2000-06: expenditures (in million €) per Member State

MEMBER STATE ESF NATIONAL PRIVATE TOTAL77 NUMBER OF MEASURES

IMPLEMENTED

AT 12 15 0 27 1

BE 24 29 1 54 3

CZ 15 8 0 23 2

DE 17 20 3 41 3

DK 63 36 50 149 5

ES 444 303 7 753 23

FI 268 362 341 971 8

FR 289 379 52 720 8

GR 328 82 0 411 2

HU 12 4 0 16 2

IE 137 108 0 246 3

IT 1,053 895 18 1,966 37

LT 22 7 0 29 1

PL 301 109 0 409 3

PT 238 129 0 367 7

SE 71 104 44 219 8

SK 16 11 2 29 3

UK 65 70 16 151 7

Total EU 3,375 2,670 534 6,579 126

Source: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008

77. Figures have been rounded to the million, so they may not add up to the total.


18 Member States used the ESF to support human potential in research and innovation and overall 126 measures were

implemented. The remaining seven EU Member States focused ESF support on other areas and did not explicitly address

research and innovation through ESF. Across the whole of the EU more than € 6.5 billion was spent in the period 2000-2006 in

order to boost human capital in research and innovation. This represents 6.2% of the overall expenditure. Italy, Finland, Spain

and France showed the highest absolute levels of funding in the area of research and innovation. Italy stands out with almost

€ 2 billion spent in this area and Finland almost reached € 1 billion. Spain and France showed similar levels of funding with

over € 700 million. Spain implemented a measure to support investment in human capital in the fi elds of research, science

and technology as well as the transfer of knowledge to the production sector in each region. The majority of funding in

France was spent on the Objective 3 programme for the whole country. In addition ESF support for research and innovation

focused on a few regions, namely two of the overseas territories (Guadeloupe and Guyane) as well as four regions of the

French metropolis (the regions Midi-Pyrénées, Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur, the Centre region and Auvergne).

EU fi nancial support always runs alongside national public funding. The ESF contribution amounts to over € 3 billion

and national co-funding amounts to over € 2.5 billion. The Nordic Member States reported a high share of private

funding with between 20% and 35% coming from private sources in Denmark, Sweden and Finland. This is not

surprising as private funding in R&D is generally high in the Nordic Member States.

In addition to the absolute levels of funding Figure 11 gives an overview of the percentage of the total expenditure

of each Member State that was dedicated to the development of human capital in research and innovation in 2000-

2006. With over 40% Finland spent by far the highest proportion on research and innovation. It implemented three

measures across the whole country as part of the Objective 3 national programme and in addition implemented fi ve

more measures in diff erent regions. This was followed by Poland with over 20% and Denmark with almost 20%. Poland

distributed the funding across three measures of both Polish OPs. Italy, which had the highest funding in absolute

terms, and Lithuania both spent between 15% and 20% of their total expenditure on research and innovation. Italy

implemented two measures in each region to improve the quality of tertiary education and training and facilitate

research. Lithuania spent all funding dedicated to research and innovation on one measure (out of fi ve measures

in Lithuania). Ireland and Slovakia both dedicated three measures and between 10% and 15% of total funding to

investments in research and innovation. All 18 Member States that used the ESF to target research and innovation,

together spent just over 6% of their total expenditure on developing human capital in research and innovation.

Figure 10: Percentage of the total expenditure spent on the development of human capital in re-

search and innovation per Member State

ATBECZ DEDK ESFI FRGR HUIEITLTPL PTSESK UKTOTALEU

45.00%

40.00%

35.00%

30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%



In terms of content of the measures Figure 12 gives an overview of the distribution of funding across the two main

areas of intervention. Out of the 18 Member States which addressed research and innovation with the ESF, ten

Member States (Italy, Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Belgium, the United Kingdom, Spain, France,

Slovakia) addressed both tertiary education and cooperation between research institutions and business. The other

Member States focused on one of the two areas, with the majority addressing tertiary education.

Figure 11: Distribution of funding across the two areas of intervention per Member State

HU

AT

LT

GR

IT

SK

DE

PT

BE

UK

ES

FI

DK

FR

Total EU

PL

CZ

IE

SE

0% 50% 100%

Developments in tertiary education in %

Cooperation between the research and business sector


2. Profi le of ESF benefi ciaries Individual people and organisations as well as systems and structures are supported by the ESF through the

fi nancing of projects. People benefi t from participation in activities such as diff erent kinds of training courses or

advice and counselling sessions. In parallel, diff erent kinds of organisations including fi rms, associations, non-profi t

organisations or educational institutions and research centres also benefi t from funding. Table 3 gives a breakdown

of organisations, participants and projects that received ESF funding in the area of research and innovation by

Member State. However, information was not always available for each category, so total fi gures for the whole EU

are likely to be higher.


Table 3: Total number of organisations, participants and projects per Member State78

MEMBER STATE ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANTS PROJECTS

AT n/a 450,000 n/a

BE 10,000 11,000 180

CZ 760 28,000 150

DE n/a 7,200 n/a

DK n/a 28,000 n/a

ES 7,600 94,000 n/a

FI 53,000 390,000 1,400

FR 1,900 670,000 150

GR n/a 150 n/a

HU n/a 95,000 60

IE n/a 420,000 18

IT 250 590,000 28,000

LT n/a 910 n/a

PT n/a 10,000 6,500

SE 4,600 86,000 1,800

SK 1,600 63,000 n/a

UK 4,300 30,000 93

Total EU 85,000 3,100,000 38,000


On the basis of available data across the whole EU over 3 million people were supported to promote human potential

in research and innovation. 85,000 organisations and almost 40,000 projects were monitored, however when

extrapolating this on the basis of the participants for those Member States where the information was not available,

actual fi gures are likely to be over 100,000 organisations and close to 50,000 projects. Overall the distribution across

the Member States for all three categories is roughly in line with the funding. Italy and France showed the highest

levels of participation with over 27,000 projects and almost 600,000 people reported as participating in Italy and

almost 700,000 participants reported in France. In Finland 1,400 projects benefi tted almost 400,000 people and over

50,000 organisations. Organisations supported in Spain were about 7,600 with over 90,000 people participating.

It is equally remarkable that despite the relatively lower levels of funding, over 4,000 organisations were reported

as receiving support in the United Kingdom and in Sweden. This was also true in Belgium where more than 10,000

organisations were documented as benefi ciaries. Poland and Ireland reported 140,000 and 420,000 participants

respectively. Hungary, despite having the lowest level of funding on research and innovation, indicated almost 100,000

participants and 60 projects benefi ting from ESF support. The relatively low number of participants reported in Greece

compared to the funding can be explained by the fact that the Greek measures were aimed at improving the education

system rather than supporting people directly. The money was therefore spent on the development of new courses of

study and new learning materials as well as scholarships and only to a lesser extent on participants of ESF activities.

78. Figures have been rounded to two signifi cant digits, so they may not add up to the total.


3. Who are the participants?

Gender breakdown

On average across all the Member States, women represented half of the participants (see Figure 13). The fi gure

is based on 78 measures (out of 126 relevant measures) for which data on gender were available. In Ireland for

about 8% of the participants no gender breakdown was available. In four Member States (Germany, Greece, Czech

Republic, Slovakia) the gender breakdown was not available at all. Assuming that the gender breakdown would

be the same for those Member States and measures where this information is not available, this would mean that

overall approximately 1.5 million women received ESF support through measures promoting human potential in

research and innovation. In Lithuania, Belgium, Spain and France the proportion of women in the area of research

and innovation is much lower than for the total number of ESF participants where it is between 44% and 56% for

these Member States. A possible explanation for this diff erence is the fact that the topic of research and innovation is

very much linked to technology and natural sciences which are traditionally more male-dominated subject areas.

Figure 12: Gender breakdown of participants per Member State

LT

BE

ES

SE

UK

DK

FI

IE

HU

PL

AT

EU TOTAL

PT

IT

FR

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Women

Men

Not available


Some Member States also initiated programmes especially targeted at women. Although the Greek measures

on research and innovation did not specify the gender breakdown, the Greek measure ‘Support programmes

for women in the undergraduate and postgraduate studies, programme studies and research programmes for

women’79 acknowledged the fundamental role of women in boosting human potential in research. Under this

measure three programmes explicitly addressing women were funded. The Austrian measure ‘Improvement of

the human potential in research, science and technology’80 especially focused on mobilising the participation of

women in tertiary education. The measure supported a variety of activities such as:

79. 2000GR051PO002, OP, Education and initial vocational training, Greece

80. 1999AT053DO001, OP, Obj. 3 SPD Austria, Austria


Coaching, mentoring and specifi c qualifi cation programmes for women; ●

Information, consultation and support of women; ●

Increasing conciliation of work and family; ●

Doctoral scholarships in technical subjects and natural sciences; ●

Awareness on gender mainstreaming in tertiary education and in research. ●

Status in the labour market

The fi gures are based on OPs from eight Member States (Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Finland, the

United Kingdom, Italy and Slovakia) where data on the status in the labour market were available. Employees and self-

employed people (both classifi ed as “employed”) make up the largest proportion (67%) of the participants. Taking into

consideration that this number refl ects those participants of ESF activities that were involved in research and innovation,

this is not surprising. Unemployed people make up the second biggest share (18%) and this may be particularly due to

a high number of unemployed people that were reached in Italy. Inactive people, in the case of research and innovation

mainly consisting of students, are the smallest group with 15%.81 If these percentages were applied to the total number

of participants assuming that the structure of the labour market is the same in the OPs and Member States where no data

was available, this would mean that 2.1 million employed, 560,000 unemployed and 470,000 inactive people benefi tted.

Age breakdown

As the age breakdown was not available for all OPs, the fi gures are based on those programmes where data were available.

Programmes in Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Italy, Portugal and Sweden provided data on age groups. Young

people under 25 years accounted for 23% and 8% were over 50 years old.82 Assuming that age structures would be the same

in those programmes and Member States where no age breakdown was available, this would mean that approximately

720,000 young people and 250,000 people over 50 years benefi tted. While the proportion for older people in research and

innovation is in line with the overall proportion of ESF participants (7%), the proportion of young people is signifi cantly

lower. Under the topic developing human potential in research and innovation young people make up 23%, however out

of the total number of ESF participants they account for 37%. This can be explained by the fact that overall one of the ESF’s

main objectives is to support young people by helping them enter the labour market. However, in the fi eld of research and

innovation this is not so much the case as people who benefi t under this topic are more likely to be already in employment

and possibly have some work experience and are therefore more likely to be in the age category of 26-50 years. This is also

confi rmed by the data on the status in the labour market where employed people are the largest group.

81. The percentages were calculated independently. The maximum data available was used for each of the respective categories. The proportions

were calculated on the basis of all measures relevant for this report which provided data on status in the labour market.

82. These two percentages were calculated independently. For the calculation of the proportion of young people and older persons, the maximum

data available was used for each of the respective categories. The proportions were calculated on the basis of all measures relevant for this report

which provided data on young people on the one hand and on older persons on the other hand.


4. What medium to long-term benefi ts did the ESF bring to the research and innovation sector?Member States used two diff erent ways of monitoring medium to long-term eff ects. On the one hand Member

States used indicators such as “jobs created” or “jobs safeguarded” to demonstrate how many work places received

ESF support without linking this to a particular person. On the other hand Member States also monitored what

happened to the people who participated in ESF measures and expressed this in indicators such as “participants

integrated into the labour market”, “participants gaining a qualifi cation” or more generally “positive outcomes on

leaving”. In some measures both kinds of indicators were used to monitor medium to long-term eff ects and in

others only one of the two categories was used. Overall, within the context of research and innovation, slightly

more measures reported on indicators relating to former participants of ESF measures than on indicators regarding

work places.

The fi gures available show that almost 70,000 jobs in the research and innovation sector were created or

safeguarded with the support of ESF funding. This is based on a total of 22 measures from Germany, Spain, Finland,

France, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom where this was monitored. In addition, over 100,000 positive

outcomes were gained from participating in ESF-funded activities. This included over 40,000 people who gained a

qualifi cation and almost 60,000 who found a job following participation in ESF-funded activities. This is based on 33

measures from Belgium, Spain, Finland, France, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and the United Kingdom where

this was monitored. Considering that the total number of relevant measures for this report is 126, actual fi gures are

very likely to be higher. However, as not even half the measures monitored medium to long-term eff ects, it is not

possible to make a reliable extrapolation.

C. DEVELOPMENTS IN TERTIARY EDUCATION

In the 2000-2006 period 69 measures in total were implemented and over € 3.5 billion (comprising ESF, national

and private funding) was spent on tertiary education. Member States implemented three types of interventions

aiming at:

Raising the skills profi le and increasing the research capacity; ●

Improving the mobility of researchers and encouraging international cooperation; ●

Making higher education accessible for everyone and promoting equal opportunities. ●

Almost 2 million people benefi ted from ESF-funded activities under measures targeted at tertiary education.

The three Nordic Member States (Finland, Sweden and Denmark) focused mainly on cooperation and transfer of

knowledge between the research and the business sector and are therefore not represented in this section. Table 4

presents the participants by Member State.


Table 4: Participants by Member State involved in interventions

related to “Improving the tertiary education sector”83

MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS

AT 450,000 FR 5,900 LT 910

BE 500 GR 150 PL 140,000

CZ 23,000 HU 95,000 PT 10,000

DE 7,200 IE 420,000 SK 63,000

ES 30,000 IT 580,000 UK 11,000

Total: 1,800,000


The highest number of participants was in Italy. This is not surprising as Italy allocated the highest level of funding

on research and innovation overall and spent most of this on the development of tertiary education. Austria and

Ireland follow. Regarding Austria, it is important to remember that the data cover the whole priority and not just

the relevant measures. The fi gures are therefore likely to be an overestimate. In Ireland ESF funding was exclusively

addressed to tertiary education and with almost € 250 million reached over 400,000 participants. In Poland over

130,000 participants, in Hungary almost 100,000 and in Slovakia over 60,000, received support. In the cases of

Hungary and Slovakia this is remarkable given that the funding levels were very low (€ 25 million or less). The

numbers for France and Spain are relatively low despite the high level of total funding, but these two Member

States spent only a small part of the total funding on tertiary education and focused on cooperation between the

research and the business sector. Greece focused mainly on improving the system rather than supporting people

directly.

1. Raising the skills profi le and increasing the research capacity Raising the skills level and increasing research capacity are major challenges faced by Europe in the area of research

and innovation. Consequently ESF also supports students and educational institutions. Between 2000 and 2006

over 40,000 researchers received support. However, this professional category was not monitored in all OPs and

Member States, so actual fi gures are likely to be higher. Table 5 shows the breakdown of researchers by Member

State for those Member States where this information was available. The highest numbers are in Spain and Italy

with between 10,000 and 25,000 researchers supported. In Portugal and in the United Kingdom between 2,000

and 5,000 researchers benefi ted and in Belgium, Lithuania and Ireland smaller numbers received support. These

numbers are roughly in line with the total number of ESF participants for these Member States. Out of these six

Member States Spain also has the highest number of total ESF participants with almost 23 million, followed by

Portugal and Italy with over 6 million and the United Kingdom with 4.7 million participants. Lithuania however, has

a relatively high number of researchers, given that the total number of ESF participants is just over 80,000.



Table 5: Number of researchers per Member State

MEMBER STATE BE ES IE IT LT PT UK TOTAL

RESEARCHERS 334 22,381 27 11,029 907 4,756 2,664 42,098


In addition to the support to researchers Member States also implemented a number of other activities in order to

improve the skills in the tertiary education sector. The Irish measure ‘Undergraduate Skills’84 was targeted at diff erent

groups such as school leavers, mature students and industry operators. This measure provided additional third level

places to meet the identifi ed skill needs of the high technology sector.

The Czech measure ‘Promoting tertiary education, research and development’85 supported activities to improve

the quality of Bachelor, Master and PhD study programmes as well as study programmes for teachers at all

education levels. Moreover, it aimed at improving the organisation of higher education by introducing modular

study programmes, including credit systems, and extending the off er of further vocational education at higher

education institutions. It also created programmes of further vocational education for employees in the research

and development sector. Overall in this measure over 300 courses were newly created. This included about 100

courses with an environmental or an information technology component.

Greece focused particularly on system actions to improve tertiary education. As a result over 500 interventions

to modernise undergraduate and postgraduate programmes were carried out. In addition almost 100 new

postgraduate programmes were designed and over 40 new departments were created.

In Poland 260 educational institutions went through accreditation processes in order to improve the quality of

education. In Italy almost 30 million hours of training in tertiary and post-tertiary education were supported with ESF.

The Lithuanian measure ‘Improvement of human resources quality in scientifi c research and innovations’86

maximised sustainable employment and increased the capacity of research students and researchers on an

international level. The principal aim of the measure was to contribute to a quantitative and qualitative increase

of human resources engaged in research and technological development. New, revised or restructured curricula

at universities in the fi elds of biotechnology, laser technology, information technology and other strategic sectors

of research were developed and implemented. In Lithuania over 20 programmes were accredited, including 13

postgraduate programmes.

Another important means to increase the research capacity and the number of research students, while at the

same time enhancing skills levels, is through the provision of scholarships and grants. Scholarships generally refer

to fi nancial aid provided to a student for the purposes of paying at least part of the cost of tertiary education. Five

Member States provided information about the number of scholarships supported with the ESF: Belgium, Greece,

84. 2000IE051PO001, OP, Employment and HR Development in Ireland Obj. 1, Ireland

85. 2003CZ051PO001, OP, Czech Republic HRD Obj. 1, Czech Republic

86. 2003LT161PO001, OP, Lithuania, Lithuania


Italy, Poland and Portugal. Greece funded by far the highest number of scholarships with over 5,000 and this can be

seen as part of the strategy to improve the education system. Portugal supported around 1,700 scholarships. This

included over 700 doctoral scholarships and 75 scholarships at Masters level. Belgium and Italy supported smaller

numbers. Poland supported almost 140,000 people through 1,700 scholarship projects.

Table 6: Number of scholarships per Member State

MEMBER STATE BE GR IT PT TOTAL

SCHOLARSHIPS 165 5,396 22 1,741 9,110


Insight 1: Hungary - Linking higher education with the world of work

Hungary focused particularly on ensuring that students have the necessary skills to enter the labour market after

graduation. The measure ‘Developing the content and structure of higher education’ under the Human Resources

Development OP (2003HU051PO001) supported the higher education system to adjust the contents of courses

to the needs of the labour market and a knowledge-based society. The aim was to establish new educational and

training programmes in higher education institutions and to deliver higher professional retraining and further

education programmes for graduates and academic and R&D staff . Moreover, the measure aimed to support the

changes necessary to implement the principles of the Bologna Process, i.e. making qualifi cations compatible

with those obtained in other EU Member States.

Over 50,000 students participated in Bachelor and Masters training under this measure. Of these 68% were

women. 87% of participants obtained a qualifi cation, found a job or gained another positive result from

participating in the training.

In addition Hungary implemented the measure ‘Strengthening cooperation of higher education institutions with

local actors’ under the Regional Development OP (2003HU161PO001) specifi cally to keep highly qualifi ed young

graduates in the regions. Eligible activities of the measure were internships for students, training programmes

for students and young graduates to enhance their personal and professional competences and management

skills, research projects for students based on the needs of regional actors and the establishment of career

centres. Overall 60 projects were funded and over 40,000 people participated. Women made up 60% of the

participants.


Insight 2: Italy - Raising the skills profi le

Italy implemented 34 measures in diff erent regions of the country in order to improve tertiary education

and research conditions by providing a link between the school system, institutions of the tertiary education

system, the training systems and fi rms. It spent € 1.8 billion in this area, which was the highest amount spent on

improving tertiary education and research by a single Member State. As a result almost 600,000 participants were

supported and almost 28,000 projects received funding. A broad range of activities were implemented:

Promoting higher and university education by establishing new programmes for post-secondary and post- ●

tertiary education and Master studies;

Innovative projects to facilitate exchanges between the research and the productive sectors; ●

Facilitation of institutional dialogue between research institutions; ●

Support for post-secondary training (post diploma) including IFTS (post-secondary education and technical ●

training) and post-tertiary education;

Integrating academic programmes with the regional vocational training system in order to create a link with ●

the labour market.

2. Mobility in research and innovation and international cooperationMobility of people, the exchange of ideas and international cooperation is facilitated through ESF programmes

and a mobility component is present in a number of measures addressing research and innovation. A number

of Italian regions provided support for young researchers to work abroad as well as exchange programmes with

other European research centres. In a number of Spanish regions researchers and technicians were encouraged

to work in a foreign research centre for a short period of time and to speak at conferences. One objective of

the Hainaut OP in Belgium (1999BE161DO001) was to promote cooperation between enterprises, research

centres and universities by integrating young researchers into common research projects with a foreign scientifi c

partner within a European framework. The programme for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly (1999GB161DO001)

provided support to visiting experts on a short and medium-term basis in order to exchange ideas and develop

the intellectual capital of the region. All of these activities contributed to the mobility of research staff and the

exchange of ideas.

Portugal planned and implemented a ‘set of mobility activities’ for students in tertiary education. The objective

of the measure ‘higher education mobility’ from the OP Science, Technology and Innovation (1999PT161PO003)

was to promote mobility between higher education institutions and enterprises (‘intersectoral mobility’). Mobility

scholarships and traineeships were provided to undergraduate and Masters level students with the aim of increasing

their employability after graduation. Overall more than 2,000 people participated in this measure. Out of these 65%

were women and 74% under 25 years old.


3. Improving access to higher education for all and promotion of equal opportunitiesThe principle of equal opportunities is mainstreamed into all programmes. This means that regardless of the

content of a measure, it always has to be ensured that the principle of equal opportunities is respected. In

addition to this a number of Member States specifi cally addressed the issue of improving access to higher

education for everyone and improving equal opportunities in research and innovation. The measure ‘Equalising

educational opportunities through scholarship programmes’ of the Polish Integrated Regional Development OP

(2003PL161PO001) focused on supporting the educational development of students coming from rural regions

and students who are at a disadvantage due to fi nancial reasons (see Insight 4).

The Welsh programmes (1999GB161DO004, West Wales and the Valleys, and 1999GB053PO001, Objective 3 East

Wales) specifi cally targeted disadvantaged groups. The programme of West Wales and the Valleys stated that

support would be especially targeted at groups which have not traditionally been active in the fi eld of innovation

and technology such as women, people from minority ethnic backgrounds and people with disabilities. In

addition the aim was to encourage innovative projects to overcome barriers to their participation and support

equal opportunities training for all personnel involved in science, ICT and innovation training. Overall 44 projects

and over 1,400 companies were supported. Out of the 8,000 participants 31% were women. Almost 200 people

with disabilities and 660 people from ethnic minorities received support. The Objective 3 programme of East Wales

followed a similar approach. Eligible activities included higher level skills programmes aimed at women, people

with disabilities and ethnic minorities and strategies to reduce disparities of gender, disability and ethnicity. This

included support for equal opportunities training for managers and equal opportunities development practices

to ensure career paths to senior positions. Under the measure “Encouraging Innovation, R&D and the Information

Society for Growth” in East Wales over 1,000 companies and over 2,600 participants received support. Women

made up just over half of the participants and 32 people with disabilities and 102 people from ethnic minorities

received support.

Ireland dedicated a whole measure to the promotion and monitoring of equal opportunities into all areas of the

educational system87. Within the framework of this measure 18 research projects were funded. There were 27

researchers working on those out of whom 22 were women. In addition 258 people participated in training out

of whom 60% were women. 12 publications were written.

87. 2000IE051PO001, OP, Employment & HR Development in Ireland Obj. 1, Ireland


Insight 3: Poland - Access to higher education for everyone

One of the challenges of equal access to academic programmes is the participation of people from rural areas.

Students coming from rural areas are more likely to have limited access to tertiary level education mostly due

to diffi cult fi nancial circumstances and additional costs of travel and accommodation. As a consequence,

opportunities in the labour market are also more limited.

The Polish measure ‘Equalising educational opportunities through scholarship programmes’88 focused on the

support for the educational development of students coming from rural regions and students who would

otherwise not be able to aff ord further education. The measure implemented a scholarship programme for

pupils of upper secondary courses that lead to a fi nal examination and to higher level institutions. This provided

an incentive for young people from rural areas to continue educational programmes. Altogether over 1,700

scholarship projects were fi nanced and almost 140,000 people benefi ted from these projects, 57% of whom

were women.

D. COOPERATION AND KNOW-HOW TRANSFER BETWEEN RESEARCH INSTITUTES AND THE BUSINESS SECTOR

Out of the 18 Member States that implemented ESF-funded measures in the area of human potential in research

and innovation, fi ve Member States (Hungary, Austria, Lithuania, Ireland and Greece) focused mainly on tertiary

education and will therefore not be considered in this section. On the other hand the three Nordic Member

States (Finland, Sweden, Denmark) and France concentrated specifi cally on cooperation and know-how transfer

between research institutes and the business sector. The other Member States funded measures to improve tertiary

education as well as cooperation and transfer of knowledge. Overall almost € 3 billion in 57 measures was spent on

cooperation and transfer of knowledge between the research and the business sector. The activities supported can

be classifi ed under the following three topics:

Improving employment through cooperation; ●

Know-how transfer to companies and innovation; ●

Competence centres and high-tech cooperation. ●

1. Improving employment through cooperationOverall in the area of promoting human potential in research and innovation, almost 70,000 jobs were created or

safeguarded. The majority of these (almost 50,000) were related to the fi eld of cooperation and know-how transfer

between research institutes and the business sector. This number is based on 17 measures from Germany, Spain,

Finland and Sweden where information was available. As the total number of relevant measures for cooperation

and know-how transfer is 57, it is likely that the overall number of jobs created or safeguarded is higher.

88. 2003PL161PO001, OP, Integrated Regional Development, Poland


In addition over 1 million people participated in related ESF-funded activities. Table 7 shows the breakdown of

the participants by Member State. France accounts for just over half of the participants. This is due to one single

measure from the Objective 3 programme with almost 600,000 participants. Finland accounted for 31% of the

participants, followed by Sweden with 7%. In the area of research and innovation both Member States focused

mainly on cooperation and transfer of knowledge between the research and the business sector which explains

the high numbers of participants. Slovakia and Germany did not support any people directly in this area and are

therefore not represented in the table on participants.

In France and Belgium together almost 6.5 million hours of training were funded. In the Finnish Objective 3

programme almost 2 million days of training and work were supported.

Table 7: Participants in cooperation and transfer of knowledge,

by Member State89

MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS MEMBER STATE PARTICIPANTS

BE 11,000 FI 390,000 PT 44

CZ 5,100 FR 670,000 SE 86,000

DK 28,000 IT 13,000 UK 19,000

ES 63,000 PL 360

Total: 1,300,000


2. Know-how transfer to companies and innovationOverall almost 70,000 organisations received ESF support in order to improve cooperation and transfer of

knowledge between the research and business sectors. The great majority of the organisations are companies (over

60,000). Apart from that, educational institutions were also supported. Table 8 shows the number of organisations

by Member State. By far the highest number was monitored in the Finnish Objective 3 programme with over

50,000 fi rms participating in ESF-funded projects in those measures relevant to this topic. One explanation for

this is the high share of private funding in Finland. In Spain over 7,000 organisations received support, in Sweden

the fi gure was over 4,500. Belgium and the United Kingdom both reported over 1,000 organisations. Spain put

special emphasis on SMEs and supported almost 5,000 SMEs. The Spanish measures focused on encouraging links

between SMEs and universities and research institutes. In order to achieve this, the Spanish programmes facilitated

the exchange of research staff with companies and the placement of students in companies.



Table 8: Organisations per Member State

MEMBER STATE BE CZ ES FI PL SE SK UK TOTAL

ORGANISATIONS 1,017 412 7,238 53,012 663 4,642 15 1,725 68,724

of which fi rms1,017 not

specifi ed

7,238 52,854 663 at least

2,375

0 1,725


In addition over 1,200 projects were implemented in Western Sweden under the measure “Cooperation between

education and business”90. The measure focused specifi cally on transfer of knowledge from universities, colleges and

other competence centres to the area’s SMEs in order to maintain existing companies and promote the creation of

new fi rms. In Finland 1,400 projects were funded for the transfer of knowledge from research institutes to companies,

similar to the measure in Western Sweden, as well as measures for the training of the workforce in order to promote

entrepreneurship (see Insight 5). In Poland 234 projects were funded under the measure “Regional innovative

strategies and knowledge transfer”91 which aimed at making the country more competitive. The objective of this

measure was to increase Poland’s capacities in the area of innovation by reinforcing cooperation between the R&D

sector and the economy. The projects funded traineeships as well as scholarships for PhD students and supported

the exchange of information and the transfer of innovations to local and regional organisations. As a result of

implementing projects 381 fi rms signed agreements with universities and other science units to support innovative

regional development.

With the support of ESF funding almost 10,000 new fi rms were created in diff erent regions of Finland. In the

German state Niedersachsen 13 start-ups were supported in a measure supporting graduates to found or take over

businesses92. It covered the preparation of graduates through training and advice sessions. An additional positive

impact of the measure is that people with advanced studies and high competence remained in the region and

fostered the regional know-how. In the Swedish islands93 over 80 fi rms were created.

90. 2000SE162DO002, PC, Västra, Sweden

91. 2003PL161PO001, PC, Integrated Regional Development, Poland

92. 2000DE162DO010, OP, Niedersachsen, Germany

93. 2000SE192DO001, OP, Öarna, Sweden


Insight 4: Finland - Know-how transfer to companies

All eight measures that Finland implemented were targeted to promoting cooperation between science and

business and knowledge transfer. Overall Finland invested € 971 million. This represents over 40% of the total

expenditure for Finland. Most of the Finnish measures aimed to strengthen the link between training and work

life with models designed jointly by educational institutions and fi rms. Partnering institutions were educational

institutions in general, research centres, technology centres and innovation centres. The activities supported

were varied but always shared the objective of promoting cooperation and know-how transfer. Examples are:

New study programmes and services in institutions of higher education ●

Developing connections between educational institutions and work life ●

Developing new technology and innovations ●

Educational cooperation and exchange of experts between enterprises, research centres and educational ●

institutions

Training programmes and services in universities enhancing economic life ●

Networking projects ●

Regional cooperation initiatives ●

With over 50,000 organisations, it had the highest number of participating organisations in this fi eld. The great

majority of the organisations were supported under the national Objective 3 programme. 400,000 people

benefi ted from participating in 1,400 projects. This was the second highest number of participants in the area of

know-how transfer between the research and the business sector. The number of new fi rms created was also very

high with 9,760. Finland was particularly successful at supporting SMEs and micro-enterprises. The vast majority

of organisations that received support were companies with less than 250 employees and over 30,000 companies

had less than 10 employees.

The success of a region in terms of innovation also manifests itself in the number of new products developed. New

products are the visible and tangible results of a knowledge-based economy. The Czech measure ‘Cooperation of

research and development institutions with the business sphere, support innovation’94 succeeded in supporting

over 5,000 people, over 400 organisations and resulted in the creation of almost 200 new products. This was

achieved through activities such as:

Improving the qualifi cations of employers and employees, especially in the fi eld of new technologies; ●

Motivating universities to create a comprehensive system of support for the creation of spin-off fi rms; ●

Introducing results of science and research into practice; ●

Promoting new technologies; ●

Creating and developing technologically focused fi rms; ●

Establishing partnerships between R&D institutes and business entities. ●

94. 2003CZ053DO001, PC, Prague Region Obj. 3, Czech Republic


3. Competence centres and high-tech cooperationSome Member States, such as Sweden, combined their national programmes with ESF funding to build up

competence centres. The mission of the “Swedish Competence Centre Programme” (1995-2007) was to strengthen

the crucial links in the Swedish National Innovation System between scientifi c research groups and industry.

Overall, competence centres created strong and innovative academic research environments with researchers from

diff erent disciplines collaborating with a network of companies. The research was focused on problems that off ered

new and exciting challenges for the scientists and were of strategic importance for the companies95.

ESF funding supported initiatives to launch “competence centres”. Sweden and Germany in particular used ESF

funding for the creation of competence centres. The measure ‘Transfer of knowledge and competence to support

regional structural change’96 in Schleswig Holstein (Germany) was built on two new models of cooperation: network

projects and competence centres. A total of eight networks and fi ve competence centres were set up. Competence

centres and networks were set up in areas such as medical technology, drug design and target monitoring, tissue

engineering, hydrogen and fuel cell technology, proteomics or wind energy.

In Sweden over 50 knowledge and technology centres were newly created in the region of the islands and in the

North. In addition almost 600 cooperation and network projects were funded in Northern and Western Sweden

and in the islands. The Swedish measure ‘Development of human resources’97 aimed to strengthen the skills-

level in companies and raise the level of education. Cooperation in the area of R&D between higher education

institutions and industry was of great importance for the development of businesses and in particular, for small and

medium-sized companies that lacked their own research facilities. Enhanced cooperation created opportunities to

convert research results into practical action. In Western Sweden the measure ‘Cooperation between education and

businesses’98 aimed to promote training to support the creation of new businesses and the renewal of business.

The interaction between fi rms and educational institutions was improved through training activities, trainee- and

internships, mentor programmes, adoption of systems and exchange programmes.

E. ESF SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN POTENTIAL IN RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN 2007-2013

1. General overviewIn the new fi nancing period ESF funding for human potential in research and innovation was extended to include

several Member States which in 2000-2006 did not address this topic. While in 2000-2006 18 Member States out

of 25 addressed the topic through the ESF, in 2007-2013 23 Member States out of 27 provided ESF funding for

95. For more information see : <http://www.vinnova.se/In-English/Activities/Strong-research-and-innovation-environments/The-Competence-

Centres-Programme-1995--2007/First-generation-Competence-Centres-in-Sweden/>

96. 2000DE162DO006, PC, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany

97. 2000SE162DO001, PC, Öarna, Sweden

98. 2000SE162DO002, PC, Västra, Sweden


research and innovation. Estonia, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands and Slovenia did not target research

and innovation in 2000-2006, but planned activities in this area in 2007-2013. In addition, the two new Member

States, Bulgaria and Romania, both address research and innovation in their ESF programmes. On the other hand,

Ireland, Sweden and Denmark, which in 2000-2006 spent between 8% and 20% of their total ESF expenditure on the

promotion of human potential in research and innovation, do not address this topic in the 2007-2013 programmes.

Cyprus continues to use ESF funding mostly for other topics and does not address research and innovation. Italy and

Spain still have a considerable number of OPs addressing the topic and continue to support research and innovation

in almost all of their regions. Germany increased funding for research and innovation and ten programmes (out of

18 German OPs) address this topic in 2007-2013 as opposed to two (out of 15 German OPs) previously.

In terms of funding there is a clear shift towards the new Member States in the current fi nancing period. Whereas in

2000-2006 the fi ve Member States with the highest share allocated to human potential in research and innovation

were a mix of old and new Member States (Finland, Poland, Denmark, Lithuania and Italy), in 2007-2013 the fi rst

fi ve Member States are exclusively new Member States (Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary and Lithuania). In terms

of absolute funding, Italy which in 2000-2006 had by far the highest ESF spending on research and innovation,

reduced this almost by half in 2007-2013). In 2007-2013 the Member States with the highest absolute ESF allocation

for research and innovation are Poland and Hungary, with Italy coming third. Across the whole EU the proportion

dedicated to research and innovation dropped slightly from 6.2% to 5.8%. The absolute spending however increased

by just over €1 billion. This increase is due to the fact that overall the ESF funding also increased in the new fi nancing

period by about €20 billion. Table 9 provides a detailed comparison of the two fi nancing periods regarding the

number of relevant OPs per Member State as well as the funding and the proportion dedicated to human potential

in research and innovation.


Table 9: Comparison of the number of OPs addressing research and innovation and funding in the two

fi nancing periods (in million €)

MS 2000-2006 2007-2013

total

number

of OPs

number of OPs

addressing hu-

man potential

in research and

innovation

Funding

(ESF

only)

% of total

expenditure

spent on hu-

man potential

in research and

innovation

total

number

of OPs

number of OPs

addressing hu-

man potential

in research and

innovation

Funding

(ESF

only)

Priority

themes

74, 3,

4, 9

% of ESF budg-

et planned

for human

potential in

research and

innovation

AT 5 1 12 2.0% 2 1 <1 0.1%

BE 11 2 24 2.2% 6 4 51 4.8%

BG not applicable 2 1 51 4.3%

CY 1 0 0 0.0% 1 0 0 0.0%

CZ 3 2 15 7.8% 3 2 311 8.2%

DE 15 2 17 0.2% 18 10 251 2.7%

DK 2 2 63 19.2% 1 0 0 0.0%

EE 1 0 0 0.0% 1 1 76 19.5%

ES 37 23 444 4.3% 22 14 294 3.6%

FI 6 5 268 41.1% 2 2 25 4.0%

FR 28 7 289 5.9% 5 3 19 0.3%

GR 19 1 328 8.6% 4 1 282 6.5%

HU 2 2 12 5.4% 2 1 577 15.9%

IE 3 1 137 13.8% 1 0 0 0.0%

IT 27 21 1053 15.2% 24 21 558 8.1%

LT 1 1 22 17.5% 2 1 118 11.5%

LU 1 0 0 0.0% 1 1 2 6.4%

LV 1 0 0 0.0% 1 1 109 19.7%

MT 1 0 0 0.0% 1 1 7 6.3%

NL 2 0 0 0.0% 1 1 12 1.4%

PL 2 2 301 23.1% 1 1 603 6.2%

PT 16 2 238 5.1% 4 3 502 7.7%

RO not applicable 2 1 285 7.7%

SE 7 5 71 8.2% 1 0 0 0.0%

SI 1 0 0 0.0% 1 1 153 20.3%

SK 2 2 16 11.9% 2 1 94 6.2%

UK 18 4 65 1.1% 6 2 29 0.6%

TOTAL 212 85 3375 6.2% 117 75 4408 5.8%

Source: fi nancial data 2006: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC), situation in September 2008; fi nancial data 2007: EC Structural Fund Database (SFC),

situation in February 2009; Number of OPs compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programmes 2000-2006 and 2007-2013


2. Highlights on Member States In terms of the content of activities to support research and innovation there were some changes in several

Member States. Belgium, which previously supported both the tertiary education system and cooperation between

the research and the business sectors, now focuses mainly on the latter. Finland, which previously focused on

cooperation and the transfer of knowledge between research institutes and companies, now also addresses the

tertiary education system. It has planned several activities in this area including the creation of new educational

systems, the establishment of research institutes, networks and centres and support to researchers and students.

On the other hand, Hungary and Lithuania which previously concentrated on improving tertiary education now

also support cooperation between research and business. Austria has shifted the focus from tertiary education to

cooperation between research and business and is now planning to enhance knowledge transfer by informing

businesses (especially SMEs) about research opportunities and funding and providing advice and support

concerning R&D projects in the private sector.

Out of the eight Member States (Bulgaria, Estonia, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia)

which have only started to support the development of human potential in research and innovation in 2007-2013,

fi ve (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, the Netherlands and Slovenia) focus on tertiary education. Romania and Malta have in

addition also planned some activities in the area of cooperation between research and business and Luxembourg

addresses exclusively this area. Latvia envisages activities to improve the quality of higher education, create new

research groups and support postgraduate study programmes. Estonia, Romania, Bulgaria, Malta and Slovenia plan

to support study at postgraduate and PhD level and provide support to researchers at diff erent stages in their career.

Malta, Luxembourg and Romania also intend to promote networking between universities, research institutes and

enterprises. In this context Luxembourg emphasises in particular the social responsibility of enterprises. In addition

Romania plans to improve access to university education and Malta is preparing campaigns to increase the interest

in science and technology education and targets in particular women in order to attract more female students

to studies of natural sciences. In Estonia ESF complements national strategies such as the “Estonian Research,

Development, Technology and Innovation 2007-2013”99. Although most of the EU funding comes from the European

Regional Development Fund (ERDF), ESF is completing the overall national “RDTI-strategy”. To increase the number

of skilled technologists and innovation managers in Estonian enterprises ESF fi nances the creation of an industrial

innovation and research recruitment scheme (“Innovation Scouts”) and the “Innovation Awareness Programme”.

The Netherlands dedicated €12 million to the development in human capital in research and innovation in the

2007-2013 fi nancing period, however the OP does not indicate under which priority axis this is allocated or what is

planned in terms of content.

In Germany, apart from the increase in funding for research and innovation, the geographical scope has expanded

and now also includes Eastern Germany. Whereas previously the programmes of Niedersachsen and Schleswig

Holstein addressed research and innovation, in 2007-2013 this issue is addressed in Bayern, Baden-Württemberg,

Hamburg, Hessen, Berlin, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt and Thüringen. The

highest funding for research and innovation is now allocated to OPs in Eastern Germany. Activities are planned in

99. Technopolis Consulting Group Belgium SPRL (2005): “Evaluation of the design and implementation of Estonian RTDI policy: implications for policy

planning”, page 37


order to support students, in particular at postgraduate level as well as activities to support networking between the

research community and companies. In Berlin the focus is on supporting students who are at risk of unemployment

after graduation. In addition Germany´s federal government has set up a central telephone advice service for higher

education institutions, research institutes and businesses that want rapid and simple access to support for research

and innovation. The ‘hotline’ gives answers on the procedures and conditions applying to all relevant support

programmes at European, federal and regional level. The advice line is designed especially to react quickly and

fl exibly to requests from SMEs.

Mobility of researchers and international cooperation also continue to be important issues in the 2007-2013

fi nancing period. Finland is planning to support international mobility and the exchange of researchers which

includes training of researchers in a foreign language, as well as international cooperation and networking between

universities. France and Hungary are both planning to support cross-border cooperation. Italy and Lithuania aim to

increase mobility of students. Italy, Portugal, Poland and Slovakia plan to support partnerships and networking with

universities and companies nationally and internationally. Lithuania plans to support joint projects of researchers and

their groups at national and international level, while Latvia envisages international cooperation between research

institutes. The Belgian OP for Flanders states as one objective to learn in a structured way about the experiences in

other Member States or regions, exchange ideas, knowledge and staff and to formulate, implement, monitor and

evaluate common projects.


Table 10: Comparison of the two programming periods in terms of topics addressed

by each Member State

2000-2006 2007-2013

Member State developments in terti-

ary education

cooperation of

research and business

sector

developments in terti-

ary education

cooperation of

research and business

sector

AT x x

BE x x x

BG x

CZ x x x x

DE x x x x

DK x

EE x

ES x x x x

FI x x x

FR x x x x

GR x x

HU x x x

IE x

IT x x x x

LT x x x

LU x

LV x

MT x x

NL x

PL x x x x

PT x x x x

RO x x

SE x

SI x

SK x x x x

UK x x x

Source: Data compiled by BBI on the basis of ESF Operational Programmes 2000-2006 and 2007-2013


Chapter 3: Conclusions and perspective

In 2000-2006 18 Member States (out of 25) used the ESF to foster human potential in ●

research and innovation, in 2007-2013 23 Member States (out of 27) do so

In 2000-2006 over €6.5 billion was spent on developing human potential in research and ●

innovation (including ESF, national and private funding); ESF on its own contributed

€3.4 billion

In 2007-2013 ESF funding dedicated to research and innovation amounts to €4.4 billion ●

In absolute fi gures, Italy spent almost €2 billion on ESF interventions in research and innovation. ●

In relative terms, Finland dedicated almost 40% of its ESF expenditure to the topic

More than 3 million people participated in measures to improve human potential in ●

research and innovation

Half of the participants were women ●

At least 85,000 organisations received funding ●

Support was particularly targeted at SMEs, especially in Spain, Sweden and Finland ●

Europe has a well-developed tertiary education sector with high numbers of students and doctoral graduates. This means

the EU also has a high potential for research activities and the development of new products. Nevertheless the EU is facing

a number of challenges when it comes to research and innovation. On the one hand, other countries, such as China or

Japan have signifi cantly increased their eff orts in research and innovation in recent years and in comparison with the US or

Japan the EU’s spending on research and innovation remains low. These external factors put pressure on the EU to keep up.

On the other hand, the EU still faces a number of internal challenges that need to be overcome in order to make research

and innovation more effi cient. Knowledge transfer in European research institutions is not maximised because of a range

of factors such as cultural diff erences between the science and the business sectors, lack of incentives and legal barriers.

In order to address these issues and to ensure better cooperation between research institutes in diff erent EU Member

States, the European Commission has launched an initiative to create a European Research Area (ERA). Objectives of the

ERA include amongst other things the strengthening of research institutions, sharing of knowledge, optimising research

programmes and priorities and improving international cooperation in science and technology. In a nutshell this means

that the EU needs to make tertiary education systems and the knowledge transfer to the business sector more effi cient.

Several instruments, such as the Research and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programmes, have been

put in place especially to address these challenges. However, the Structural Funds, including the ESF also play an important

role. The aim of the ESF is not to fi nance research and innovation directly, but rather to contribute to the development of

human potential, that is well-qualifi ed human resources, who can work in the sector of research and innovation.

53Chapter 3: Conclusions and perspective

Overall achievements of the ESF in developing human potential in research and innovation

In 2000-2006 18 Member States (out of 25) used the ESF to address research and innovation and a total of € 6.5 billion

(comprising ESF funding and national and private co-fi nancing) was dedicated to developing human potential in

research and innovation. Out of this €3.4 billion came from the ESF itself, the remaining funding came from national

and private co-fi nancing. Italy had the highest absolute spending with almost €2 billion and Finland dedicated the

highest share of ESF funding to research and innovation with over 40%. Overall more than 3 million people participated

in measures regarding research and innovation and half of them were women. In addition 85,000 organisations were

reported as having received support, although the actual fi gure is likely to be higher.

The study covers activities where there is signifi cant involvement of institutions of the tertiary education system,

such as universities, research centres or higher education institutions. Additionally, interventions aiming to reinforce

cooperation and know-how transfer between business and tertiary education establishments were taken into

account. Measures relating only to secondary education or vocational training were excluded from this report as

they will be addressed under other topics.

ESF contributions towards the European Research Area

ESF measures included several elements in order to reinforce the objectives of the ERA in particular in the area

of improving tertiary education and in promoting mobility and international cooperation. In the Czech Republic

activities were supported to improve the quality of Bachelor, Masters and PhD study programmes and the

organisation of higher education in general. Greece carried out over 500 interventions to modernise undergraduate

and postgraduate programmes and designed 100 new postgraduate programmes. In Poland 260 educational

institutions went through accreditation processes in order to improve the quality of education. In Lithuania over 20

programmes were accredited, including 13 postgraduate programmes. In Italy almost 30 million hours of training in

tertiary and post-tertiary education were supported with ESF. Italy spent €1.8 billion on improving tertiary education

and research and establishing new study programmes. Consequently almost 600,000 participants were supported

and almost 28,000 projects received funding.

As regards mobility and international cooperation, the ESF also made several contributions in the 2000-2006 period.

In several Spanish regions researchers and technicians were encouraged to work in a foreign research centre

for a short period of time and to speak in conferences. A number of Italian regions provided support for young

researchers to work abroad as well as exchange programmes with other European research centres. One of the

Belgian programmes aimed to promote cooperation between enterprises, research centres and universities by

integrating young researchers into common research projects with a foreign scientifi c partner within a European

framework. The English programme for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly provided support to visiting experts on a

short and medium-term basis in order to exchange ideas and develop the intellectual capital of the region. All of

these activities contributed to the mobility of research staff and the exchange of ideas. In the 2007-2013 period

mobility of researchers and international cooperation continue to be addressed through the ESF and corresponding

activities are planned in Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Poland, Slovakia, Latvia and Belgium.


A focus on SMEs and microenterprises

Spain, Finland and Sweden focussed particularly on supporting SMEs and micro-enterprises. Consequently in Spain

almost 5,000 SMEs received support and in Finland, out of 50,000 organisations which received support, the great

majority were companies with less than 250 employees and over 30,000 companies had less than 10 employees.

In Sweden SMEs without their own research facilities benefi tted from the creation of over 50 knowledge and

technology centres and almost 600 cooperation and network projects which received ESF funding. In the area

of research and innovation support to SMEs and microenterprises as well as help for the development of new

products, is particularly valuable due to the high costs that SMEs in Europe have to pay for patent applications and

patent protection.

The current fi nancing period: a shift towards the new Member States

In the current fi nancing period 2007-2013 23 Member States (out of 27) address research and innovation through

the ESF and € 4.4 billion is dedicated to this from the ESF. In terms of funding there is a clear shift towards the new

Member States. Whereas in 2000-2006 the fi ve Member States with the highest share allocated to human potential

in research and innovation were a mix of old and new Member States (Finland, Poland, Denmark, Lithuania and

Italy), in 2007-2013 the fi rst fi ve countries are exclusively new Member States (Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary and

Lithuania). The Member States with the highest absolute ESF allocation for research and innovation are Poland and

Hungary, as opposed to Italy and Finland in the previous fi nancing period. As government expenditure on research

and development in these Member States is generally rather low compared to the rest of the EU, the contribution

of the ESF, in combination with the other Structural Funds, is particularly signifi cant in the new Member States.

In conclusion it is fair to say that while research and innovation is not one of the main priority areas of the ESF, the

ESF nevertheless complements other EU instruments in this area signifi cantly. ESF has made an impact in particular

in the areas of international cooperation and mobility, modernising tertiary education and thereby improving

research capacities and skills of students and researchers as well as the transfer of knowledge between research

institutes and the business sector. Moreover, it provides support in those areas where it is particularly needed, most

notably the new Member States and SMEs.

55Annexes

Annexes

ANNEX 1: EXPENDITURE 2000-2006 AND BUDGET 2007-2013

1. Operational Programmes 2000-2006 co-funded expenditure claimed (in € million) per Member State

MS EU % National Public % National Private % Total

AT 43.7% 48.7% 7.6% 1,326

BE 34.7% 55.3% 10.1% 2,416

CY 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 22

CZ 69.8% 30.2% 0.0% 297

DE 46.5% 45.7% 7.8% 20,930

DK 41.5% 37.2% 21.3% 779

EE 69.3% 25.9% 4.9% 71

ES 60.4% 38.4% 1.2% 17,388

FI 31.4% 42.9% 25.6% 2,365

FR 43.4% 50.8% 5.8% 12,204

GR 78.6% 21.4% 0.0% 4,783

HU 75.6% 24.4% 0.0% 288

IE 53.9% 45.8% 0.3% 1,778

IT 52.7% 45.5% 1.8% 12,909

LT 74.6% 25.4% 0.0% 166

LU 45.3% 52.8% 2.0% 47

LV 75.2% 24.8% 0.0% 115

MT 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 9

NL 49.6% 21.6% 28.8% 2,458

PL 74.3% 25.7% 0.0% 1,776

PT 62.2% 34.2% 3.6% 7,145

SE 31.3% 39.1% 29.6% 2,661

SI 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 60

SK 74.0% 25.2% 0.8% 241

UK 44.1% 51.5% 4.4% 13,285

EU 25 51.3% 42.8% 5.9% 105,518


2. Operational Programmes 2000-2006 co-funded expenditure claimed (in € million) per Objective

OBJ EU National Public National Private TOTAL

1 31,090 16,705 833 48,628

2 1,954 2,225 575 4,754

3 21,104 26,112 4,811 52,027

TOTAL 54,147 45,042 6,219 105,408

3. Operational Programmes 2007-2013 co-funded budget (in € million) per Member State

MS EU % National Public % National Private % Total Budget

AT 44.3% 46.4% 9.3% 1,184

BE 46.3% 49.8% 4.0% 2,320

BG 85.0% 15.0% - 1,395

CY 80.0% 20.0% - 150

CZ 85.1% 14.9% - 4,436

DE 59.9% 30.6% 9.6% 15,666

DK 50.0% 33.4% 16.6% 510

EE 84.8% 11.2% 4.1% 462

ES 70.5% 28.4% 1.1% 11,426

FI 43.5% 56.5% - 1,420

FR 52.5% 35.9% 11.6% 10,275

GR 76.2% 23.8% - 5,726

HU 85.0% 15.0% - 4,270

IE 27.6% 72.2% 0.2% 1,360

IT 45.3% 54.7% - 15,321

LT 85.0% 8.7% 6.3% 1,210

LU 50.0% 50.0% - 50

LV 83.8% 13.0% 3.1% 657

MT 85.0% 15.0% - 132

NL 48.7% 27.4% 23.9% 1,705

PL 85.0% 15.0% - 11,420

PT 70.7% 29.3% - 9,210

RO 85.0% 15.0% - 4,335

SE 50.0% 50.0% - 1,383

SI 85.0% 15.0% - 889

SK 85.0% 15.0% - 1,764

UK 52.0% 46.9% 1.1% 8,598

EU 27 64.8% 32.1% 3.2% 117,275

57Annexes

ANNEX 2: ESF VOCABULARY

The table below compares a number of documents and concepts across the two consecutive programming

periods.

2000–2006 PROGRAMMING PERIOD 2007–2013 PROGRAMMING PERIOD

The Community Support Framework (CSF) is the

basic programming document agreed between the

European Commission and the Member States, setting

out plans for Structural Fund support for objective 1

regions. It identifi es the problems, the strategy and

the priorities for action and where money should

best be channelled. It must be supplemented by

more detailed Operational Programmes. CSF’s are not

compulsory for the objectives 2 and 3.

The National Strategic Reference Framework

(NSRF) is not a management instrument as the CSF

were in the preceding period. However, it defi nes

policy priorities whilst suggesting the key elements

of implementation such as the list of operational

programmes and an indicative annual allocation from

each Fund for each Operational Programme It is applied

to the convergence and regional competitiveness and

employment objectives. It is optional for the territorial

cooperation objective.

The Operational Programmes (OPs) detail how and where funds will be spent, what the expected impact is

and how the programmes will be monitored and evaluated. OPs may exist at a national or regional level.

An OP can cover only one of the three Objectives. An

OP can be fi nanced by more than one Fund.

An OP can cover more than one objective but can be

fi nanced by only one Fund.

Priorities are a set of aims within a operational

programme that have to be tackled through the

implementation of specifi c Measures.

In the new programming period priorities are formally

called Priority Axes. Resource allocation (community

and national co–fi nancing) is done at the level of the

priority axes.

Measures are the means by which a Priority is

implemented over several years and which enable

operations to be fi nanced. Measures are listed in

the Operational Programmes, fully described in the

Programme Complements and reported on in the

Annual Implementation Reports. Resource allocation

(community and national co–fi nancing) is done at the

level of the measure.

There are no measures in the 2007–2013

Programming Period. Instead of this, the description of

the priority axes contains an indicative list of actions.

Programme Complements (PC) provide further

details on the implementation of the operational

programmes such as the indicators that are used.

Programme complements may be formulated as

needed throughout the implementation of the OP.

There are no Programme Complements for the

2007–2013 Operational Programmes. Information that

was contained in the PC such as about the indicators

is now to be found in the OP itself.

The Policy Fields refer to the fi ve broad types of

activities than can be fi nanced with ESF. Most OPs

are structured along these policy fi elds, one priority

corresponding to one policy fi eld.

The types of activities that can be fi nanced with ESF

are called priorities.


2000–2006 PROGRAMMING PERIOD 2007–2013 PROGRAMMING PERIOD

Annual Implementation Reports (AIR) are prepared every year by the national or regional managing authorities

and describe the progress on the implementation of the priorities and the fi nancial implementation of the

assistance. AIRs also report on the main socio–economic trends or on changes in national, regional or sectoral

policies that are relevant to the implementation of the assistance.

Indicators are used to “indicate” the outcomes of the ESF interventions. The types of indicators that are relevant

to this study can be quite diverse in nature: (i) output indicators relate to the immediate consequences of an

activity and are measured in physical or monetary units, e.g. number of people trained, number of fi rms fi nancially

supported. (ii) result indicators relate to the direct and immediate eff ects on direct benefi ciaries brought by a

programme. Result indicators can be of a physical (e.g. number of successful trainees) or fi nancial nature (e.g.

leverage of private sector resources); (iii) impact indicators refer to the consequences of the programme beyond

the immediate eff ects on its direct benefi ciaries.

ANNEX 3: LIST OF ESF 2000-2006 MEASURES USED FOR THE STUDY

MS Obj. CCI Title of the Programme priority + measure100

AT 3 1999AT053DO001 Austria Obj. 3 3.32

BE 1 1999BE161DO001 Hainaut 2.5

BE 2 2000BE162DO008 Meuse - Vesdre 2.3

BE 2 2000BE162DO008 Meuse - Vesdre 3.2

CZ 1 2003CZ051PO001 Czech Republic HRD Obj. 1 3.2

CZ 3 2003CZ053DO001 Prague Region Obj. 3 4.2

DE 2 2000DE162DO006 Schleswig-Holstein 1.7

DE 2 2000DE162DO006 Schleswig-Holstein 3.3

DE 2 2000DE162DO010 Niedersachsen 1.9

DK 3 1999DK053DO001 Denmark Obj. 3 4.1





ES 3 2000ES053PO301 Aragon Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO302 Baleares Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO303 Cataluña Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO304 Comunidad De Madrid Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO305 Navarra Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO306 Pais Vasco Obj. 3 5.1

ES 3 2000ES053PO307 La Rioja Obj. 3 5.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO003 Andalucia 2.1

100. The numbers of measures are taken from the SFC DG Employment Database.

59Annexes


ES 1 2000ES161PO005 Canarias 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO006 Castilla-La Mancha 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO007 Castilla y León 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO009 Comunidad Valenciana 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO010 Extremadura 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO011 Galicia 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO013 Murcia 2.1

ES 1 2000ES161PO015 Spain Research, Development & Innovation 2.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO002 Aragon 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO003 Baléares 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO004 Cataluña 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO005 La Rioja 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO006 Madrid 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO007 Navarra 3.1

ES 2 2000ES162DO008 Pais Vasco 3.1

FI 3 1999FI053DO001 Finland SPD Obj. 3 4.41



FI 1 1999FI161DO001 Pohjois-Suomen (North Finland) 1.3

FI 1 1999FI161DO002 Itä-Suomen (East Finland) 2.1

FI 1 1999FI161DO002 Itä-Suomen (East Finland) 2.2

FI 2 1999FI162DO001 Etelä-Suomen (South Finland) 2.2

FI 2 1999FI162DO002 Länsi-Suomen (West Finland) 2.2

FR 3 1999FR053DO001 France SPD Obj. 3 4.7

FR 1 2000FR161DO001 Guadeloupe 5.3

FR 1 2000FR161DO002 Guyane 5.3

FR 1 2000FR161DO002 Guyane 15.3

FR 2 2000FR162DO002 Auvergne 1.2

FR 2 2000FR162DO011 Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur 1.5

FR 2 2000FR162DO016 Centre 2.8

FR 2 2000FR162DO018 Midi-Pyrénées 3.11

GR 1 2000GR051PO002 Education and initial vocational training 2.2

GR 1 2000GR051PO002 Education and initial vocational training 4.2

HU 1 2003HU051PO001 Hungary HRD 3.3

HU 1 2003HU161PO001 Hungary Regional development 3.3

IE 1 2000IE051PO001 Employment & HR Development in Ireland Obj. 1 26

IE 1 2000IE051PO001 Employment & HR Development in Ireland Obj. 1 29B

IE 1 2000IE051PO001 Employment & HR Development in Ireland Obj. 1 31A

IT 3 1999IT053PO002 Marche Obj. 3 3.33



IT 3 1999IT053PO002 Marche Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO003 Piemonte Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO003 Piemonte Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO004 Emilia Romagna Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO004 Emilia Romagna Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO005 Toscana Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO005 Toscana Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO006 Bolzano Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO006 Bolzano Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO008 Trento Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO008 Trento Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO009 Valle d'Aosta Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO009 Valle d'Aosta Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO010 Lombardia Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO010 Lombardia Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO011 Umbria Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO011 Umbria Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO012 Abruzzo Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO012 Abruzzo Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO013 Liguria - Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO013 Liguria - Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO014 Veneto Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO014 Veneto Obj. 3 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO015 Friuli Venezia Giulia 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO015 Friuli Venezia Giulia 4.44

IT 3 1999IT053PO016 Lazio Obj. 3 3.33

IT 3 1999IT053PO016 Lazio Obj. 3 4.44

IT 1 1999IT161PO003 Italy Research, Technological Development and Advanced Training 3.1

IT 1 1999IT161PO003 Italy Research, Technological Development and Advanced Training 3.4

IT 1 1999IT161PO006 Calabria 3.7

IT 1 1999IT161PO007 Campania 3.13

IT 1 1999IT161PO007 Campania 3.7

IT 1 1999IT161PO008 Molise 3.6

IT 1 1999IT161PO009 Puglia 3.7

IT 1 1999IT161PO011 Sicilia 3.13

IT 1 1999IT161PO012 Basilicata 3.11

LT 1 2003LT161DO001 Lithuania 2.5

PL 1 2003PL051PO001 Poland Human Resources Development 2.2

PL 1 2003PL161PO001 Poland Integrated Regional Development 2.2

61Annexes


PL 1 2003PL161PO001 Poland Integrated Regional Development 2.6

PT 1 1999PT161PO003 Portugal Science, Technology and Innovation 4.1





PT 1 1999PT161PO004 Portugal Information Society 1.2

PT 1 1999PT161PO004 Portugal Information Society 6.1

SE 1 1999SE161DO001 Norra Norrland 3.5

SE 1 1999SE161DO002 Södra Skogslänenregionen 2.5

SE 1 1999SE161DO002 Södra Skogslänenregionen 5.2

SE 2 2000SE162DO001 Öarna 2.1

SE 2 2000SE162DO001 Öarna 2.2

SE 2 2000SE162DO001 Öarna 2.3

SE 2 2000SE162DO002 Västra 2.1

SE 2 2000SE162DO003 Norra 2.1

SK 1 2003SK051PO001 Slovakia HR Development 3.32

SK 3 2003SK053DO001 Bratislava Region 2.21

SK 3 2003SK053DO001 Bratislava Region SDP Obj. 3 2.22

UK 3 1999GB053PO001 East Wales Obj.3 4.3

UK 1 1999GB161DO001 Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly 3.9

UK 1 1999GB161DO001 Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly 5.4

UK 1 1999GB161DO004 West Wales and the Valleys 2.4

UK 2 2000GB162DO002 West Midlands 1.12




ANNEX 4: STANDARDISED INDICATOR NAMES USED FOR ANALYSIS

The indicators used in the report have been collected from the offi cial ESF Operational Programme reports

(Annual Implementation Reports and Evaluations). Each Member State defi ned a set of physical indicators “to be

able to monitor a programme’s implementation and judge its performance against the objectives set”101. In each

Operational Programme (and more specifi cally in the Programme Complements) a set of indicators have been

defi ned and target levels that corresponded to the objectives of the programme have been assigned.

There are three levels of indicators that were used for the analysis: output, result and impact indicators102.

In order to analyse all indicators from diff erent Operational Programmes, a procedure was introduced to standardize

the indicators’ names.

This procedure consisted of inserting the indicator name in the database in its original language, then translate it

into English and allocate it a name mentioned in the list below.

Standardised indicator’s

name

Ex: Participants (TOTAL)

Indicator name in its

original language

Ex: Anzahl der geplanten

TeilnehmerInnen

Indicator exact translation

in English

Ex: Number of planned male

and female

101. European Commission Directorate-General XVI Regional Policy and Cohesion: coordination and evaluation of operations The New Programming

period 2000-2006: methodological working papers WORKING PAPER 3. Indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation: An indicative methodology.

(Brussels: 2000) <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffi c/working/doc/indic_en.pdf>

102. For a description of the diff erences between types of indicators see Annex 4 - ESF Vocabulary.

63Annexes

List of standardised output, result and impact indicator names:

OUTPUT INDICATORS103

Name of the standardised

indicator

Defi nition Further specifi cations

Participants (TOTAL) Total participants of a measure or a

priority starting the activities.

Characteristics of participants can

be defi ned according to:

- Gender: male, female, both

- Age: <25, 25-55, >55

- Status in the labour market:

employed, self-employed

(entrepreneurs), unemployed,

short-term unemployed (less than

12 months), long-term unemployed

(more than 12 months), inactive (all

people between 16 and 64 years old

who are not classifi ed as employed

or unemployed, inactive in training

(mainly students), workers with

special status

- Educational level: primary or lower

secondary, upper secondary, post-

secondary non-tertiary, tertiary,

post-tertiary, other non-academic,

vocational education, lower than

primary level

- Vulnerable groups: minorities,

migrants, disabled, other

disadvantaged groups, EU

citizens, third-country nationals,

disabled+migrants

- Status: researcher, student,

household, apprentice, teacher,

trainer, manager, social worker,

health worker, civil servant, farmer

Participants Participants104 starting the activities in

a measure or a sub-measure (activity

or action)

Participants (completing) Participants completing the activities

in a measure or in a sub-measure

(activity or action)

Participants (interrupting) Participants interrupting the activities

in a measure or in a sub-measure

(activity or action)

Participants (continuing

the same activities)

Participants continuing the same

activities even after the end of the

implementation year

103. Please note that some standardised indicators can be used at diff erent levels, according to the context of the intervention.

104. Participants without specifi cation are considered to be benefi ciaries starting.



indicator


Organisations (TOTAL) Total of organisations participating in

a measure

Characteristics of organisations are:

microenterprises, SMEs, fi rms (size

not specifi ed), large enterprises,

organisations not specifi ed, public

employment services (PES), schools

or education institutions (referring to

the individual schools/educational

institutes or training organisations

participating in a measure/being

supported), non-profi t organisations

(community, voluntary, charity, NGOs)

Organisations Organisations include all kinds of

organisations supported or involved

in ESF activities

Systems + Structures Systems or structures supported by

ESF

Systems and structures can be:

educational (for measures addressing

the creation or improvement of

school or educational systems or parts

of educational systems / structures in

a specifi c area/region, i.e. the creation

of new departments in universities,

lifelong education centres etc), human

resource management, other

Initiatives implemented Activities or initiatives implemented

under a measure

Partnerships Partnerships or networks supported

Courses Training courses (programmes)

realised under a measure

Curricula designed New education or training courses

developed (list of topics + objectives,

teaching methods and contents)

Services delivered New services designed under ESF

delivered to participants

Research and analysis Studies, research realised

Jobs created105 Workplaces created

Jobs supported Workplaces supported

Jobs safeguarded Workplaces safeguarded

Qualifi cations achieved106 Number of qualifi cations (certifi cations)

obtained by participants after the end

of training activities

105. If those jobs refer to people placed into employment they could be used as result indicator and added to “Participants integrated into the labour

market”. The indicator “Jobs created” is in fact used as Output or Result depending on the context.

106. Although in most of OPs it is listed as Output, “Qualifi cations achieved” can also be used as result indicator and analysed together with

“Participants gaining a qualifi cation”.

65Annexes


indicator


Projects funded (TOTAL) Total projects funded undear a

measure or priority

Projects funded ESF projects funded (started)

Projects completed

(TOTAL)

Total projects completed within a

measure or priority

Projects completed ESF projects completed

Start-ups supported New start-ups supported

Firms created New fi rms created

Events organised Events, conferences or meetings

organised

Products new New products developed under a

measure

Scholarships Number of scholarships funded under

an ESF measure or priority

Places created Number of units created (for students

at universities, or for little children at

day-care, etc.)

Days Number of days the activity concerned

was implemented

Hours Number of hours during which the

activity (training, counselling, etc) was

implemented

Years Years of duration of activities or

projects

Months Months of duration of activities or

projects

Apprenticeship places

created

New apprenticeship places created

Apprenticeship places

supported

Number of apprenticeship places

receiving ESF support

Incentives Economic individual incentives (for

training or business creation, self

employment, etc.)

Equipment New equipment items purchased (e.g.

PC stations, etc.)

Participants* days Number of participants multiplied by

number of days of activity

Participants*Hours Number of participants multiplied by

number of hours spent on the activity



indicator


Indirect Benefi ciaries For example: a measure is directed at

students, but teachers are trained in

order to teach the students. Teachers

are therefore indirect benefi ciaries

Electronic tools Electronic / virtual tools developed

(portals, branch points, software etc)

Internships places created Number of placements created

Vacancies notifi ed to PES Vacancies about which the PES is

informed, which is an indicator of

measuring success of contacts with

employers

Action plans Individual action plans or employment

plans for jobseekers produced

RESULT INDICATORS


indicator


Positive outcomes on

leaving

This label is used for all results

indicators for a measure, so all positive

outcomes of the measure after the

end of the activities

Participants starting a

training

After having benefi ted from

counselling services or guidance

activities

Participants integrated into

the labour market

People integrated into the labour

market after the end of the activities

People integrated into the LM are

classifi ed according to the time

elapsed between completing the

activity and integrating on the LM: 0-3

months, 3-6 months, 6-12 months,

more than 12 months

Participants gaining a

qualifi cation

Participants gaining a qualifi cation

after the end of training activities

Participants following

insertion paths

Participants following insertion paths

in the labour market after the end of

activities

Start-ups existing after 1 yearNumber of start-ups that continue to

exist 1 year after their creation

67Annexes

IMPACT INDICATORS

Name of the standardised indicator Defi nition

Activity rate General activity rate of a Member State / region /

sector

Unemployment rate General unemployment rate of a Member State /

region / sector

Start-ups existing after 2 years Number of start-ups that continue to exist 2 years after

their creation

Unemployment rate of young people on the total

unemployment rate

The relation of youth unemployment (persons aged

16-24 years) to the total unemployment rate (M/F)

Long-term unemployed on the total unemployedThe relation of long-term unemployed persons (12-24

months) to the total number of unemployed persons

Participants that consider an advantage participating

in the measure

Percentage of persons who consider that their

participation in the measure was advantageous for

them

Employment rateGeneral employment rate of a Member State / region /

sector

Student access to Internet index

productivity growthThe indicator measuring student access to the

Internet

Participation in lifelong learning (% of 25-64 years age)Share of the population between 25-64 years old

which participates in lifelong learning activities

Participants starting tertiary education

Share of persons who continue studies at the college

among total of high school pupils -recipients of the

scholarship in the last grade

ANNEX 5: LIST OF ESF 2007-2013 PRIORITY AXES USED FOR THE STUDY

MS Obj CCI Title of the Programme Priority axis

AT 1 2007AT051PO001 Burgenland P3

BE 1 2007BE051PO001 Hainaut P2

BE 2 2007BE052PO001 German-speaking Community of Belgium P1

BE 2 2007BE052PO002 Wallonie-Bruxelles P2

BE 2 2007BE052PO005 Vlaanderen P4/P5

BG 1 2007BG051PO001 Bulgaria Human Resources Development P3

CZ 2 2007CZ052PO001 Praha Adaptability P1

CZ U 2007CZ05UPO002 Czech Republic Education for Competitiveness P2/P4



DE 1 2007DE051PO001 Brandenburg P2

DE 1 2007DE051PO002 Mecklenburg-Vorpommern P1/P2/P3

DE 1 2007DE051PO004 Sachsen P2

DE 1 2007DE051PO005 Sachsen-Anhalt P1

DE 1 2007DE051PO006 Thüringen P2

DE 2 2007DE052PO001 Baden-Württemberg P2

DE 2 2007DE052PO002 Bayern P2

DE 2 2007DE052PO003 Berlin P2

DE 2 2007DE052PO005 Hamburg P2

DE 2 2007DE052PO006 Hessen P2

EE 1 2007EE051PO001 Estonia Human Resource Development P2

ES 1 2007ES051PO002 Castilla La Mancha P3

ES 1 2007ES051PO003 Extremadura P3

ES 1 2007ES051PO004 Galicia P3

ES 1 2007ES051PO005 Andalucia P3

ES 1 2007ES051PO008 Melilla P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO001 Canarias P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO002 Castilla y Leon P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO003 Comunidad Valenciana P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO004 Aragon P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO005 Baleares P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO007 Cataluña P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO008 Madrid P3

ES 2 2007ES052PO011 La Rioja P3

ES U 2007ES05UPO001 Spain Employment and Adaptability P3

FI 2 2007FI052PO001 Mainland Finland P3

FI 2 2007FI052PO002 Finland: Åland P1

FR 1 2007FR051PO002 Guadeloupe P2

FR 1 2007FR051PO003 Guyane P1

FR 1 2007FR051PO004 La Réunion P1

GR U 2007GR05UPO002 Greece Education and Lifelong Learning P4

HU U 2007HU05UPO001 Hungary Social Renewal P4/P8

IT 1 2007IT051PO001 Campania P4

IT 1 2007IT051PO002 Calabria P4

IT 1 2007IT051PO003 Sicilia P1/P4

IT 1 2007IT051PO004 Basilicata P4/P5

IT 1 2007IT051PO005 Puglia P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO001 Abruzzo P1/P2/P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO002 Emilia Romagna P4

69Annexes


IT 2 2007IT052PO003 Friuli Venezia Giulia P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO004 Lazio P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO005 Liguria P2/P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO006 Lombardia P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO007 Marche P5/P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO008 Molise P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO009 Bolzano P5/P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO010 Trento P2/P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO011 Piemonte P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO012 Toscana P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO013 Umbria P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO014 Italy Employment P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO015 Veneto P4

IT 2 2007IT052PO016 Sardegna P1/P4

LT 1 2007LT051PO001 Lithuania Human Resource Development P2/P3/P3

LU 2 2007LU052PO001 Luxembourg P3

LV 1 2007LV051PO001 Latvia Human Resources and Employment P1

MT 1 2007MT051PO001 Malta Empowering people for more jobs and a better quality of life P1

NL 2 2007NL052PO001 Nederland information not available

PL 1 2007PL051PO001 Poland Human Resources P4/P8

PT 1 2007PT051PO001 Portugal Employment P1

PT 2 2007PT052PO001 Madeira Human Potential Valorisation and Social Cohesion P1

PT U 2007PT05UPO001 Portugal Human Potential P4

RO 1 2007RO051PO001 Romania Human Resources Development P1

SI 1 2007SI051PO001 Slovenia Human Resources Development P1

SK U 2007SK05UPO001 Slovakia Education P1/P4

UK 1 2007UK051PO002 West Wales and the Valleys P3

UK U 2007UK05UPO001 England and Gibraltar P5

Note:

1 – Convergence Objective

2 – Regional Competitiveness and Employment Objective

U – Multiple Objective Programmes


TABLESTable 1: Researchers - total numbers and by sector (%), 2001 16

Table 2: Research and Innovation in Member States 2000-06: expenditures (in million €) per

Member State

30

Table 3: Total number of organisations, participants and projects per Member State 33

Table 4: Participants by Member State involved in interventions related to “Improving the

tertiary education sector”

37

Table 5: Number of researchers per Member State 38

Table 6: Number of scholarships per Member State 39

Table 7: Participants in cooperation and transfer of knowledge, by Member State 43

Table 8: Organisations per Member State 44

Table 9: Comparison of the number of OPs addressing research and innovation and funding in

the two fi nancing periods (in million €)

48

Table 10: Comparison of the two programming periods in terms of topics addressed by each

Member State

51

Index of fi gures, tables and insights

FIGURESFigure 1: Number of OPs and total ESF co-funded expenditure per Objective in the ESF

2000–2006 period

5

Figure 2: Average yearly participation per Member State 6

Figure 3: The proportion of the yearly average of ESF benefi ciaries per Member State in

relation to the total population between 16–64 years per Member State

6

Figure 4: Total ESF co-funded expenditure per Member State: proportion between ESF and

Member State funds

7

Figure 5: Total ESF co-funded expenditure per participant per Member State (in €) 8

Figure 6: ESF community expenditure per participant per Member State (in €) 8

Figure 7: Gender breakdown of ESF participants 9

Figure 8: Status of ESF participants in the labour market 9

Figure 9: R&D intensity (Government Expenditure on R&D as % of GDP), 2005 18

Figure 10: Percentage of the total expenditure spent on the development of human capital in

research and innovation per Member State

31

Figure 11: Distribution of funding across the two areas of intervention per Member State 32

Figure 12: Gender breakdown of participants per Member State 34

71Index of fi gures, tables and insights

INSIGHTS

Insight 1: Hungary - Linking higher education with the world of work 39

Insight 2: Italy - Raising the skills profi le 40

Insight 3: Poland - Access to higher education for everyone 42

Insight 4: Finland - Know-how transfer to companies 45

What esf does for youesf: active labour market policies and public employment services

esf: adaptability of enterprises and continuing training of workers

esf: developing human potential in research and innovation

esf and labour mobility

esf: education and lifelong learning

esf: women, gender mainstreaming and conciliation of work and private life

esf and Roma

esf: sustainable development and eco–technologies

esf: migrants and minorities

esf: urban areas and local employment

esf and older workers

esf and health

esf and entrepreneurship

esf and young people

esf and disabled

esf and institutional capacity

esf and social inclusion

esf and equality mainstreaming

esf and social partners

esf support to building partnerships

esf and culture

Check the latest on these publications at http://ec.europa.eu/esf

the european social fund: developing human potential in...

Documents