Rolls-Royce plc Interest Representative Register ID: 58290033126-06 Written response to - European Commission
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Rolls-Royce plc
Interest Representative Register ID: 58290033126-06
Written response to
Consultation document: Green Paper on a Common
Strategic Framework for future EU Research and
Innovation Funding
Issued by the European Commission, 9th February 2011
To support and supplement our reply to the questionnaire, please find here below some additional
input.
Rolls-Royce
We are a world-leading provider of power systems and services for use on land, at sea and in the air.
We have a broad customer base comprising more than 500 airlines, 4,000 corporate and utility aircraft
and helicopter operators, 160 armed forces, more than 2,500 marine customers, including 70 navies,
and energy customers in nearly 120 countries, with an installed base of 54,000 gas turbines.
We employ over 39,000 skilled people in offices, manufacturing and service facilities in over 50
countries. Our predominant operations and facilities are in Europe and a significant element of our
supply chain is also European based.
Annual underlying revenues were £10.8 billion in 2010 with a firm and announced order book of £59.2
billion as at 31 December 2010, providing good visibility of future levels of activity.
Rolls-Royce operate in sectors where improvements help address many of the wider societal
challenges that the EU faces such as climate change, energy security and supply and mobility. In
2010, we invested £923 million (€1.054 million) in research and development, two thirds of which had
the objective of further improving the environmental aspects of our products, in particular the reduction
of emissions. We therefore support the focus on societal challenges and believe that this should drive
the EU research agenda with a clear focus on delivery of innovation. As a global power systems
provider, the funding support for some of these challenges allows us to invest in longer term
technologies that are some way from the market, for example: tidal energy and open rotor
technologies in aircraft engines. Given the long life cycles and complexity involved, continuity in public
funding is essential.
Rolls-Royce has experience of accessing research and innovation funds from a number of
governmental sources and is therefore able to compare the process in the EU with other countries.
We believe the EU could learn from the best practice used on similar collaborative instruments
globally. We conduct research in UK, Germany, Finland, Norway and Sweden in Europe plus USA,
Canada and Singapore. Rolls-Royce regularly evaluates the effectiveness of this global network and
such an assessment influences our global investment decisions. Rolls-Royce has gathered
experience through our participation in many EU research programmes such as FP7 programmes, the
Clean Sky JTI, MANUFUTURE and Waterborne to name a few recent ones. Our experience shows
that Norway, USA and Canada have a simpler and shorter time to grant with an appropriate level of
accountability. European industry needs simpler, more flexible and streamlined rules to stimulate
participation in programmes irrespective of company size.
1We believe we are the sort of company and business that the European Union (EU) wants to protect
and promote as part of its new growth strategy ‘Europe 2020’ to help the EU become a smart,
innovative, sustainable and inclusive economy in order to help deliver high levels of employment,
productivity and social cohesion while still respecting the environment.
The Green Paper touches on many relevant issues but words now need to be turned into action -
especially when it comes to simplification and streamlining of requirements and continuity in funding to
achieve innovation and long-term growth in Europe. Rolls-Royce welcomes the opportunity to
contribute to the discussion and would encourage this dialogue to continue through the CSF process.
This document is on record and may be freely quoted or reproduced with acknowledgement.
Our contact details are provided here below.
Rolls-Royce plc Registered Office: 65 Buckingham Gate
London SW1E 6AT
UNITED KINGDOM
Company Number: 1003142. Registered in England
Contacts: Ric Parker
Director of Research Technology
Email: richard.parker@rolls-royce.com
Charlotte Andsager
Vice President – EU Affairs
Email: charlotte.andsager@rolls-royce.com
2Online questionnaire for the Green Paper on a common strategic framework for EU
research and innovation funding.
This European Commission Green Paper proposes major changes to EU research and
innovation funding to make participation easier, increase scientific and economic impact and
provide better value for money. The questions are the same as those set out in the Green
Paper. To facilitate responding, you are asked to rate the relative importance of the aspects
covered in each of the questions. Text responses are limited to 1500 characters. If you wish to
provide detailed written comments you are encouraged to use the written response submission
form.
Information about the respondent
I am answering as: Commercial organisation with more than 250 employees.
Country of location: UK HQ with significant operations in Finland, Germany,
Norway, and Sweden and service centres throughout Europe.
My/ my organisations' main activity is Manufacturing and services
The name of my organisation is Rolls-Royce plc.
My organisation has received funding from: FP7 and the nationally funded
programmes in UK, Finland, Germany, Norway and Sweden.
Have you or do you intend to submit a separate written response to this consultation?
Yes.
Working together to deliver on Europe 2020
The questions in this section correspond to Section 4.1 of the Green Paper.
1. How should the Common Strategic Framework make EU research and innovation
funding more attractive and easy to access for participants? What is needed in addition
to a single entry point with common IT tools, a one stop shop for support, a streamlined
set of funding instruments covering the full innovation chain and further steps towards
administrative simplification?
Rolls-Royce has experience of accessing research and innovation funds from a number of
governmental sources and is therefore able to compare the process in the EU with other countries. We
believe the EU could learn from the best practice used on similar collaborative instruments globally.
We conduct research in UK, Germany, Finland, Norway and Sweden in Europe plus USA, Canada
and Singapore. Rolls-Royce regularly evaluates the effectiveness of this global network and such an
assessment influences our global investment decisions. Our experience shows that Norway, USA and
Canada have a simpler and shorter time to grant with an appropriate level of accountability. In
comparison, in the UK, where the process most closely resembles the EU‟s Framework Programmes,
the time to contract (submission to start of work) is 3 to 6 months quicker. The UK claims process
(submission to cash received) is also quicker than the FP process. In addition, the EU audit
requirements are different from national authorities‟ requirement which adds cost for the industry
participants. Streamlining and simplification of requirements are essential.
3For the CSF to be truly effective and competitive it will need to ensure it learns from the application of
other schemes and becomes more responsive to its users.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
2 How should EU funding best cover the full innovation cycle from research to
market uptake?
The characteristics of the sectors Rolls-Royce operates in are marked by the high complexity
of its systems and systems of systems, all of which are technology and capital intensive, and
subject to very long life cycles (20-30 years). The challenges the EU faces in areas such as
energy efficiency and reduced emissions will also require long-term commitment through
research to achieve significant improvements. Therefore, an understanding of the need for
continuity in funding due to the long-term nature of many sectors is needed.
Industry delivers innovation. The decline of industrial participation in the Framework
programme is thus a serious concern that must be reversed. The current range of instruments
(L0, L1, L2, L3) are largely fit for purpose. However, the biggest gap today is in opportunities
to validate technology at a system level both for product technology and for manufacturing
process technology. This does not automatically mean large and expensive; it does require
more flexibility of the sort offered in L3 programmes such as Clean Sky.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important
3 What are the characteristics of EU funding that maximise the benefit of acting at
the EU level? Should there be a strong emphasis on leveraging other sources of funding?
EU funding fulfils three benefits that are not available through other mechanisms. First it
allows a global company like Rolls-Royce to share the outputs across its pan-European
operations in different sectors – develop once; use many times. Hence we have been able
learn from experiences and improvements in our aerospace products and allow our other
sectors (such as marine and energy) to benefit from this. Second, it allows Rolls-Royce to
provide opportunities (e.g. engine demonstrators) to the European supply chain to both meet
Rolls-Royce technology requirements and improve the competitiveness of the European
supply chain. Third, it allows SMEs access to potential customers; in the Clean Sky public
private partnership, European SMEs account for 24% of the partners selected through open
calls. The experience from the Aerospace sector is that industry is the best coordinator of the
different funding sources to ensure duplication is minimised. ACARE and now Flightpath
2050 illustrate this.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
4 How should EU research and innovation funding be used to pool Member States'
research and innovation resources? Should Joint Programming Initiatives between
groups of Member States be supported?
In our experience, industry and national authorities already work effectively together in the
EU to ensure optimum use of research and innovation resources at a European level. This
4should continue. We believe this meets the requirements of the EU proposal for Joint
programming Initiatives.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important
5 What should be the balance between smaller, targeted projects and larger,
strategic ones?
With the move towards innovation the balance should tend towards larger projects. However,
there is a requirement for validation of multi-disciplinary, complex systems to simulate real
operations. This will require more flexibility in the delivery of such programmes to maximise
their exploitation potential.
A balance needs to be achieved between smaller targeted projects and larger, strategic ones
based on these factors.
The need to innovate within the sector and to ensure the leadership and competitiveness
of European industry and technology with respect to foreign counterparts.
The need to continue working on the creation of knowledge necessary in the future (i.e.
ensure involvement of academic stakeholders to keep up with necessary skills and
requirements needed to educate future professionals as well as to connect with industry.
To this end, Rolls-Royce is involved in programs with more than 30 European
universities in the UK, Germany, Sweden and Norway and also participates in
programmes in the US, India and Singapore.
The need to promote the participation of all sector players (see also question 16)
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
6 How could the Commission ensure the balance between a unique set of rules
allowing for radical simplification and the necessity to keep a certain degree of flexibility
and diversity to achieve objectives of different instruments, and respond to the needs of
different beneficiaries, in particular SMEs?
The project officer should work with the consortium to agree a simple set of principles and
objectives. More importance should be given to the quality of the project deliverables than the
process by which they were achieved. We must have a more reactive and flexible approach by
all concerned to maximise the value of the outputs.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
7. What should be the measures of success for EU research and innovation funding?
Which performance indicators could be used?
The “Europe 2020” strategy sets the objective for EU R&D spending by 2020 at 3% of GDP.
The CSF should help achieve this and should be measured against this target to ensure
European competitiveness. Another way to measure success is in terms of progress within
different sectors‟ emission reduction efforts and setting concrete objectives for areas like
energy efficiency and security of supply. Finally, emphasis could also be put on deliverables
5such as job created or exports made possible as a result of a research project. Regarding
success at the programme level, objective quantitative assessment against strategic goals
should be used eg the AGAPE study on FP7 aerospace R&T vs. Vision 2020 goals.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
8. How should EU research and innovation funding relate to regional and national
funding? How should this funding complement funds from the future Cohesion policy,
designed to help the less developed regions of the EU, and the rural development funds?
EU research and innovation funding should be used for issues that relate to the EU as whole
and hence it is inappropriate to relate this to regional and national funding. There is a risk that
by using research and innovation funding to complement cohesion policy, already scarce
funding will be further diluted, reducing overall EU competitiveness and ultimately the
industrial investment from well developed regions into less developed regions.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Of some importance.
Tackling Societal Challenges
The questions in this section correspond to Section 4.2 of the Green Paper.
9. How should a stronger focus on societal challenges affect the balance between
curiosity-driven research and agenda-driven activities?
Societal challenges are definable pan-EU issues where industry has a significant contribution
to make. Rolls-Royce is focused on addressing societal challenges such as climate change,
energy security and supply. In 2010 Rolls-Royce invested £ 923 million (€1.054 million) in
research and development, two-thirds of which was aimed at improving the environmental
performance of our products. We therefore support the focus on societal challenges and
believe that this should drive the EU research agenda with a clear focus on delivery of
innovation. As a global power systems provider, the funding support for some of these
challenges allows us to invest in longer term technologies that are some way from the market,
for example: Tidal energy and open rotor technologies in aircraft engines. Given the long life
cycles and complexity involved, continuity in public funding is essential.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
10. Should there be more room for bottom-up activities?
The current range of instruments already caters sufficiently for smaller „bottom up‟ proposals.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Of some importance.
11. How should EU research and innovation funding best support policy-making and
forward-looking activities?
6By encouraging a challenging approach and eliminate mediocrity. A time of financial
austerity gives a real opportunity to clear the decks. The Transport white paper recognises that
a business as usual approach is not sufficient to address the social agenda. The EU‟s research
agenda and funding priorities should help ensure future European growth and
competitiveness.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
12. How should the role of the Commission's Joint Research Centre be improved in
supporting policy-making and forward-looking activities?
Rolls-Royce welcomes the opportunity to engage more with the JRC in the way we proactively engage
with other global research organisations to maximise the effectiveness of academic output to achieve
more innovation.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
13. How could EU research and innovation activities attract greater interest and
involvement of citizens and civil society?
It is important that there is wider recognition of the EU‟s research and innovation agenda and
the contribution of industry. Not least to attract new talent to European research centres and
universities and industry in need of these talents. One way of raising awareness could be to
inform students from an early age of the exciting career possibilities there are in research
environments in Europe. The Rolls-Royce Science Prize in the UK, now in its seventh year,
rewards inspirational science teaching in schools. Each year, the company awards finalists
cash prizes to help teachers fund exciting science teaching projects in their schools or
colleges. See also question 24. Better linkage between European R&D programmes
achievements and changes in consumer behaviour with regards to the take up of new
technologies could also add value for industry by help pave the way to market for new
technologies.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Of some importance.
Strengthening competitiveness
The questions in this section correspond to Section 4.3 of the Green Paper.
14. How should EU funding best take account of the broad nature of innovation,
including non-technological innovation, eco-innovation and social innovation?
EU funding should enable cross border, cross purpose research that addresses several
challenges and assess complex systems and facilitate system integration. Through our own
research into improvements of power systems, we achieve fuel burn improvement and
reduced emissions. These equate to increased energy efficiency and climate change gains for
society. Equally, we look at manufacturing processes and supply chain distribution which
could lead to innovation in the way these are structured. One area where several sectors such
as engineering, soft ware and pharmaceutical companies could benefit from a holistic
approach is „High value manufacturing‟. This should be a key priority in the CSF in order for
7the EU to maintain competitiveness vis-à-vis emerging economies and accelerate GDP
growth. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our ideas on this issue in more detail.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
15. How should industrial participation in EU research and innovation programmes
be strengthened? How should Joint Technology Initiatives (such as those launched in the
current Framework Programmes) or different forms of 'public private partnership' be
supported? What should be the role of European Technology Platforms?
The Clean Sky 50:50 public private partnership (PPP) has been a real stimulus to industrial
participation in innovation –particularly SMEs. PPPs are essential to overcome market failure
which is a major roadblock to innovation. These partnerships should be developed and
extended in the CSF as the primary vehicle for the EC to monitor innovation. They do not
need to be multi billion euros to qualify. Our experience in aerospace with ACARE is a good
example of this: It is an independent agenda setting body that influences funding decisions
and future research strategy; it is not an operational body. This part is best done by dedicated
bodies such as the Joint Undertaking. Our experience in WATERBORNE and
MANUFUTURE suggests that a flexible approach works best.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Very important.
16. How and what types of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) should be
supported at EU level; how should this complement national and regional level schemes?
What kind of measures should be taken to decisively facilitate the participation of SMEs
in EU research and innovation programmes?
2300 companies work in our supply chain in Europe. Our estimate is that is that 460 of those
are SMEs. It is equally important in the EU‟s pursuit for SME growth that the role of the large
companies in feeding the supply chain containing SMEs is not ignored or misunderstood
since the success of large companies is important to a thriving SME sector. We often see that
large companies act as incubators of entrepreneurs that go off to start SMEs after eyeing a
niche in the market based on their experience as employees in larger companies. Hence, we
would caution against the EU predetermining which types of SMEs should be supported as
this could be limiting for innovation in the EU. But SMEs often lack deployment and
maintenance experience/expertise. The experience of the Energy Technology Institute (ETI) is
that SMEs are a major source of innovation but lack processes to develop robust systems. The
CSF is an opportunity to do more to encourage these synergies to grow. Programmes with
supply chain focus could foster cooperation and secure knowledge sharing among bigger
companies like Rolls-Royce and smaller SMEs and help combine the innovative forces of
SMEs with the implementation muscles of larger companies and thereby create jobs and
growth. Finally, as previously noted simplification and speed is essential to facilitate SME
access to programmes.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
17 How should open, light and fast implementation schemes (e.g. building on the
current FET actions and CIP eco-innovation market replication projects) be designed to
allow flexible exploration and commercialisation of novel ideas, in particular by SMEs?
8Rolls-Royce is not in a position to give input to this question.
18. How should EU-level financial instruments (equity and debt based) be used more
extensively?
Funding for research can be increased if EU funds can be leveraged more effectively. It
should be possible for projects that can demonstrate the potential for high European added
value and commercialisation to blend grants from the EU budget with loans from the
European Investment Bank and other financial institutions. Currently, this is a relatively
cumbersome process that needs to be streamlined with better coordination between the
relevant bodies. Part of the EU budget could be used to guarantee loans and/or bonds during
the development phase that could fall away once the project met certain milestones in terms
of commercial realisation.
The fundamental problem is that commercial banks are not in the business of lending for
research funding unless the credit of the borrower is otherwise acceptable and it is capable of
generating revenues to service debt and interest. These banks would lend with the benefit of a
sovereign guarantee of repayment on research projects where they could then take the credit
risk once the project was commercially viable. All research projects are essentially equity
risk until such time as they are in a position to generate revenues where they can then be
leveraged with debt more effectively. The equity-debt bottle neck can only practically be
solved in the research phase by an EU desire to want to support strategic investments with
projects that represent high European added value and an acceptance that returns will be
lower than third party equity demands on the basis of the broader benefits to the European
economy.
Consideration should be given to creating a body within the EU that could arrange „turnkey‟
financing in the research phase, interfacing with the EU budget provider, EIB, EBRD etc, and
guaranteeing commercial loans, such that the end users could have a single point of contact
rather than having to piece it together themselves.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
19. Should new approaches to supporting research and innovation be introduced, in
particular through public procurement, including through rules on pre-commercial
procurement, and/or inducement prizes?
Rolls-Royce is not in a position to give input to this question.
20. How should intellectual property rules governing EU funding strike the right
balance between competitiveness aspects and the need for access to and dissemination of
scientific results?
The current rules achieve a reasonable balance.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
Strengthening Europe's science base and the European Research Area
The questions in this section correspond to Section 4.4 of the Green Paper.
921 How should the role of the European Research Council be strengthened in
supporting world class excellence ?
Rolls-Royce is not in a position to give input to this question.
22 How should EU support assist Member States in building up excellence?
Rolls-Royce is not in a position to give input to this question.
23. How should the role of Marie Curie Actions be strengthened in promoting
researcher mobility and developing attractive careers?
Whilst the Marie Curie Actions are clearly a successful mechanism to promote the movement
of researchers within the EU, in particular, the Intra-European Fellowships for career
development (IEF), they are mainly limited to post-doctorate candidates. There are
considerable benefits potentially in providing similar schemes that would apply during
doctoral research and that would enable researchers to carry out part of their studies at other
universities, research institutes or in industry in another EU country. Such a scheme would
enable the participant‟s research to benefit from a broader range of experience and facilities in
their field and promote industrial relevance and awareness
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
24. What actions should be taken at EU level to further strengthen the role of women in
science and innovation?
If Europe is to remain a competitive and growing economy, it needs to be able to attract talent
from a larger pool to studies in science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM studies).
This would also create a broader base for developing and recruiting female researchers for the
future.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
25. How should research infrastructures (including EU-wide e-Infrastructures) be
supported at EU level?
In aerospace, the EU is still able to field a number of world class aerospace test facilities –
however, the number of these has reduced and many that are left are being allowed to age and
deteriorate as national funding is cut. Existing world class facilities should be maintained if
there is consensus among stakeholders. This issue is a facilitator for International
Cooperation. Rolls-Royce now uses a number of facilities in the USA and Canada where the
capability or capacity is not available in the EU.
For marine and offshore structure hydrodynamic research, the EU possesses state-of-the-art
facilities. These include ship towing tanks, ocean basins and cavitation tunnels at world-class
university and research institutes in several different EU countries. This collective capability
10ensures that the EU still leads the world in this field of research, but it is under growing
pressure from other countries where the marine and offshore industries continue to experience
rapid growth. The CSF should enable the support of these vital research infrastructures,
aiming particularly at the significant reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions that can be
obtained from the advanced high efficiency marine transport.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
26. How should international cooperation with non-EU countries be supported e.g. in
terms of priority areas of strategic interest, instruments, reciprocity (including on IPR
aspects) or cooperation with Member States?
Rolls-Royce operates in a global market place and we cooperate with non-EU companies
through our global supply chain and manufacturing processes. EU focus on this in terms of
research programmes could be of interest as long as the topics and countries for international
cooperation are carefully selected to serve the interest of the industry without endangering its
expertise. The principle of reciprocity should be involved in the selection of topics to avoid
any breach in critical knowledge. With this in mind science and technological agreements
with third countries should be strategic and balanced. We need to acknowledge that the EC
procedures for collaborative research are alien to every other country outside of the EU so
some flexibility will be necessary.
How important are the aspects covered in this question? Important.
27 Which key issues and obstacles concerning the ERA should EU funding
instruments seek to overcome, and which should be addressed by other (e.g. legislative)
measures?
Rolls-Royce is not in a position to give input to this question.
Closing questions
Are there any other ideas of comments which you believe are important for future EU
research and innovation funding and are not covered in the Green Paper?
The Green Paper touches on many relevant issues but words now need to be turned into action
- especially when it comes to simplification and streamlining of requirements and continuity
in funding to achieve innovation and long-term growth in Europe. Rolls-Royce welcomes the
opportunity to contribute to the discussion and would encourage this dialogue to continue
through the CSF process.
11You can also read
