Science

with and for Society

in Horizon 2020
Achievements
and Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Research and
Innovation
Science with and for Society in Horizon 2020 - Achievements and Recommendations for Horizon Europe

European Commission
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Directorate G — Research & Innovation Outreach
Unit G.2 - Academic R&I and Research Organisations
Contact Apostolia KARAMALI
Email Apostolia [email protected]
  [email protected]

European Commission
B-1049 Brussels

Research Executive Agency

Directorate B - Industrial Leadership and Societal Challenges
Unit B.5 - Spreading Excellence, Widening Participation, Science with and for Society
Contact Ales FIALA
Email [email protected]

Manuscript completed in June 2020.

The European Commission is not liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse of this publication.
The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission.
More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu).
PDF ISBN 978-92-76-17249-9 doi:10.2777/32018 KI-01-20-165-EN-N
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020

© European Union, 2020

The reuse policy of European Commission documents is implemented based on Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the
reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Except otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided
appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated.
The European Union does not own the copyright in relation to the following elements:
Image credits: Cover page image © Hurca!, #189765582, 2020. Source: stock.adobe.com
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Science
with and for Society
in Horizon 2020
Achievements
and Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Written by:
Niamh Delaney, Zeno Tornasi, Raluca Iagher, Roberta Monachello, Colombe Warin

Edited by:
Zeno Tornasi and Niamh Delaney

Directorate-General for Research and Innovation

2020 Science with and for society
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 5

INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................10

METHODOLOGICAL NOTE ..............................................................................................14

Data sources ........................................................................................................14

Analytical approach...............................................................................................15

1. OVERVIEW OF SWAFS IMPLEMENTATION IN HORIZON 2020......................................17

1.1. Evaluation process.......................................................................................17

1.2. Project implementation ................................................................................25

2. RESEARCH ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY .......................................................27

2.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................28

2.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................28
2.3. Achievements .............................................................................................31
2.4. Recommendations .......................................................................................42

3. SCIENCE EDUCATION ...........................................................................................45

3.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................45

3.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................45
3.3. Achievements .............................................................................................48
3.4. Recommendations .......................................................................................54

4. SCIENCE CAREERS ...............................................................................................56

4.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................57

4.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................58
4.3. Achievements .............................................................................................61
4.4. Recommendations .......................................................................................63

5. GENDER EQUALITY ...............................................................................................65

5.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................65

5.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................67
5.3. Achievements .............................................................................................70
5.4. Recommendations .......................................................................................74

6. INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES TOWARDS RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION ......77

6.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................77

6.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................79
6.3. Achievements .............................................................................................83

7. CITIZEN SCIENCE AND CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT ........................................................94

7.1. Policy objectives ..........................................................................................94

7.2. Project portfolio ..........................................................................................95

2
 7.3. Achievements .............................................................................................98
7.4. Recommendations ..................................................................................... 103

8. OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICATIONS AND DATA ......................................................... 106

8.1. Policy objectives ........................................................................................ 106

8.2. Project portfolio ........................................................................................ 106
8.3. Achievements ........................................................................................... 108
8.4. Recommendations ..................................................................................... 109

9. SCIENCE COMMUNICATION ................................................................................. 111

9.1 Policy objectives ........................................................................................ 111

9.2 Project portfolio ........................................................................................ 112
9.3 Achievements ........................................................................................... 113
9.4 Recommendations ..................................................................................... 115

CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................................. 116

GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ 118

LIST OF COUNTRY CODES ........................................................................................... 120

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................... 121

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Number of SwafS projects in Horizon 2020, as of 15/05/2020 ............................... 15

Table 2: SwafS proposals data in Horizon 2020 ............................................................... 18
Table 3: Research Ethics and Research Integrity project portfolio ....................................... 30
Table 4: Science Education project portfolio .................................................................... 47
Table 5: SYSTEM 2020 dissemination ............................................................................. 51
Table 6: Science Careers project portfolio ....................................................................... 59
Table 7: Gender Equality Plan (GEP) project portfolio ....................................................... 68
Table 8: Other Gender Equality project portfolio .............................................................. 69
Table 9: Institutional changes in Research Funding and Performing Organisations and Higher
Education Institutes RRI project portfolio ........................................................................ 80
Table 10: Institutional changes in industry RRI project portfolio ......................................... 81
Table 11: Institutional changes in territorial governance RRI project portfolio ...................... 81
Table 12: Knowledge base RRI project portfolio ............................................................... 82
Table 13: Examples of institutional changes in the RRI dimensions..................................... 82
Table 14: Co-creation project portfolio ............................................................................ 96
Table 15: Citizen science project portfolio ....................................................................... 97
Table 16: Open access to publications and data project portfolio ...................................... 108
Table 17: Science Communication project portfolio ........................................................ 113

2
LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1: Evolution of budget allocated to ‘Science with and for Society’ in EU FPs ................... 10
Fig. 2: Applicants for SwafS-2019 single call for proposals ................................................ 20
Fig. 3: RRI flagging across Horizon 2020 projects ............................................................ 22
Fig. 4: Gender flagging in Horizon 2020 .......................................................................... 23
Fig. 5: Number of coordinators in Member State (MS) ...................................................... 30
Fig. 6: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)....... 30
Fig. 7: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ........................................................... 30
Fig. 8: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ......... 46
Fig. 9: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ....... 46
Fig. 10: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ......................................................... 46
Fig. 11: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ........ 58
Fig. 12: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ..... 58
Fig. 13: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ......................................................... 60
Fig. 14: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ........ 67
Fig. 15: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ..... 68
Fig. 16: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ......................................................... 68
Fig. 17: Number of GEP-implementers in Member States (MS), Associated Countries (AC) and
Third Countries (TC) ..................................................................................................... 72
Fig. 18: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ........ 80
Fig. 19: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ..... 80
Fig. 20: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ......................................................... 81
Fig. 21: Number of institutional changes produced by 12 RRI projects in Member States (blue),
Associated Countries (green) and Third Countries (red). ................................................. 834
Fig. 22: Number of institutional changes produced by 12 RRI projects in the RRI dimensions.84
Fig. 23: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ........ 95
Fig. 24: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ..... 95
Fig. 25: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC) ......................................................... 96
Fig. 26: The citizen engagement ‘escalator’ ................................................................... 101
Fig. 27: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) ................................................. 107
Fig. 28: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ... 107
Fig. 29: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) ................................................. 112
Fig. 30: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC) ... 112

4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document reports on the Horizon 2020 Science with and for Society (SwafS) project portfolio
results. Thus, the first to acknowledge are all the scientists and researchers involved, ensuring
excellent research.

The report was prepared with the support of Federica Roffi, Deirdre Furlong, Pepa Krasteva,
Cristina Marcone, Simona Misiti, David Monteiro, Christopher Niehaus, Katherine Quezada, Yiannis
Vacondios, Ioanna Stavridou, Sylvia Osipof, Agne Dobranskyte-Niskota, Antonio Scarafino,
Wolfgang Bode, David Pina and Wilco Graafmans from the Research Executive Agency (REA); and
Isidoros Karatzas, Yves Dumont, Albena Kuyumdzhieva, Karen Slavin, Rinske Van Den Berg,
Mihaela Elena Costache, Mina Stareva, Athanasia Moungou, Anne Pepin, Michael Arentoft, Linden
Farrer, Jean-François Dechamp, Victoria Tsoukala, Alea López de San Román, Aleksandra Hebda,
Cécile Maréchal, Michèle Magermans, Vasiliki Kosiavelou and Vanessa Monnet from DG Research
and Innovation (DG R&I).

5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Research and innovation are essential to finding solutions to the pressing challenges we
face. It requires opening up the research and innovation system to the participation and
collective intelligence of society, embedding high integrity and ethics standards, raising
interest in science, and supporting Europe’s brightest minds engage in scientific careers.
Put simply, Europe cannot thrive without ensuring the best possible match between the
immense potential achievements science has to offer and the needs, values and
aspirations of citizens.

The objective of this report is to convey the achievements of the Science with and for
Society (hereinafter SwafS) part of Horizon 2020, stemming from funded projects and
key activities. Its purpose is to serve as input for the preparation of the Horizon Europe
programme implementation.

This executive summary takes a glimpse at some of the elements addressed in each
chapter corresponding to the thematic areas of SwafS.

Overview of SwafS Implementation in Horizon 2020

A budget of EUR 462 million was earmarked for SwafS in Horizon 2020. Close to 2,000
proposals submitted in response to the annual calls for proposals, conveys strong
interest in SwafS matters.
The annual evaluations are deemed to be highly robust. So far, they resulted in 150
funded projects and close to 50 more projects are expected to stem from the final calls
under Horizon 2020. Since the start of this Framework Programme, REA Unit B.5
manages the projects. SwafS projects are typically composed of large consortia with an
average of 11 partners and tend to run for around 3 years.

Research ethics and research integrity

For all research activities funded by the European Union, adhering to the highest
standards of research ethics and integrity is pivotal to achieving research excellence in
all domains. To this end, the SwafS projects produced a broad array of tools to promote
and support compliance including education material, guidelines, toolkits and Standard
Operating Procedures frameworks.

To tackle the complex ethical challenges of new emerging technologies with high socio-
economic impact (genomics, human enhancement and human–machine interaction,
artificial intelligence and big data), a cluster of projects are working on enhancing the
existing legal and normative framework of such fields and contribute to the ongoing
policy discussions on their governance and regulatory aspects.

To develop research integrity educational materials and innovative resources, dedicated

projects are working in synergy to develop tailored curricula and educational tools to
promote a culture of research integrity.

To strengthen the EU capacity to uphold the highest ethical standards for research
carried out in Europe and worldwide, a dedicated European Network of research ethics
committees and research integrity offices (ENERI) has been set up to strengthen
exchanges of good practice and increase collaboration among the main national research
integrity and ethics actors.

In 2019, at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity in Hong Kong, the Embassy
of Good Science platform was launched as a ‘one stop shop’ for all ethics and research
integrity reference materials and trainings, with its outreach extending beyond Europe.

6
 Science education

Creative and innovative science teaching and learning help young people make the best
use of their capacities to become a force of innovation. The main goals of science
education include boosting the participation rates of young people in STEM 1 with a view
to encouraging long-term careers in these fields. More broadly speaking, science
education seeks to equip citizens with the skills required to partake actively in science.
Science education projects produced a range of ready-to-use material for students
(online lessons, an online encyclopaedia and a range of apps) and teachers (repositories
and tool-kits encompassing practical tips to support their teaching). With schools at the
heart of science education, a number of projects are developing an open schooling model
to facilitate outreach to the local community.
The European Union Contest for Young Scientists (EUCYS) is the flagship competition for
science education and has proven to be an excellent way to engage and showcase the
work of students and young scientists.
Scientix, the community for science education in Europe, promotes and supports a
European-wide collaboration among STEM education professionals. Looking to the future,
Scientix is well placed to facilitate exploitation of the vast array of material produced and
ensure project outcomes are fully harvested.

Science careers
The European Research Area (ERA) priorities underline the importance of an open labour
market for researchers, entailing the removal of barriers to researchers’ mobility as well
as enhancing their training and career opportunities. The EURAXESS – Researchers in
Motion initiative strives to become the global support and career development tool for
researchers, both in terms of their mobility within and beyond Europe as well as
networking with researchers from all over the world.

Enhancement of EURAXESS services included expanding its services centres

geographically as well as offering researchers a suite of tools for their career
development to equip them for an international career. On-campus events in a number
of countries complemented this effort.

The challenge of migration flows led to the Science4Refugees initiative directed towards
enabling refugee researchers or scientists (granted asylum in a host country) to pursue
their educational path or enter the labour market. Finally, with the advent of the Open
Science Agenda, attention has shifted to developing the open science skills of
researchers with new projects recently embarking in this area.

Gender equality
Since the Commission’s ERA Communication of 2012, gender equality as a priority has
strengthened progressively. Three objectives were identified: gender equality in careers
at all levels; gender equality in decision making; integration of the gender dimension
into Research and Innovation (R&I) content. To achieve these objectives the EC has
devised a comprehensive strategy to support national reforms and foster an institutional
change2 within research funding and research-performing organisations, including
universities, through the implementation of gender equality plans (GEP), supported
under SwafS.

1
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
2
An institutional change is a change (with meaningful impact) in terms of how a beneficiary governs or structures itself in
relation to any of the RRI dimensions (public engagement, open access, gender, ethics, science education), and lasts beyond
the lifetime of project funding. See more on the explanation of the notion here.

7
The ERA Communication of 2012 outlined minimum requirements for a GEP. Along with
these, and building on lessons learned from EU-funded GEP projects, the GEAR tool
(developed by the European Institute for Gender Equality in collaboration with DG R&I)
offers step-by-step guidance with concrete examples to develop GEPs in Research
Performing Organisations (RPOs). GEP projects produced a wealth of resources useful for
organisations seeking to develop such plans, including a glossary of gender equality-
related terms, handbooks on the recruitment and promotion processes, indicators etc.,
as well as a suite of trainings.

In addition, policy-related projects support a coherent framework of activities including

trans-national policy networks, communities of practice on GEPs, a gender equality
academy for GEPs, tackling gender bias in allocation of funds, integrating a gender
perspective in international cooperation as well as pan-European data collection and
analysis on gender in R&I within the She Figures publications.

GEPs are a pioneering tool in terms of structural institutional change and a key
instrument for gender equality in R&I policy. The European Commission’s new Gender
Equality Strategy 2020-2025 indicates that Horizon Europe will introduce new measures
to strengthen gender equality, such as the possibility to require a gender equality plan
from applicants. Such an approach would foster a European-wide recognition of the
importance of gender equality as a component for achieving excellence.

Institutional Changes towards Responsible Research and Innovation

The Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approach supported by the European
Commission since 2011 encourages societal actors to work together during the whole
research and innovation (R&I) process to better align R&I and its outcomes with the
values, needs and expectations of society. RRI topics have been geared towards
establishing institutional changes in higher education institutes, research funding and
performing organisations, industry, SMEs, as well as local and regional authorities,
opening them up to closer co-operation with citizens and civil society. After analysing
where organisations stand in terms of existing RRI practices, projects drafted action
plans to support the implementation of institutional changes intended to last beyond the
lifetime of project funding.

Projects focused on implementing institutional changes in research funding and

performing organisations, higher education institutions, as well as research and
technology organisations in terms of their governance systems related, for instance, to
ethics, open science, citizen engagement and gender equality. Industry-focused projects
produced practical tools and highlighted promising practices to enable the development
of innovative products and services that directly address societal needs while
contributing to environmental and economic sustainability. The territorial portfolio of
projects supports around 10 per cent of all EU regions to develop more open and
collaborative approaches to society by taking a Responsible Research and Innovation
approach. Many of the projects from across this portfolio have taken disciplinary or
sectoral approaches (e.g. focused on marine research institutes, the biosciences, or de-
industrialising regions), suggesting that drawing on common links can foster productive
environments for conceptualisation and implementation of institutional changes.

Furthermore, RRI projects produced an array of invaluable resources for organisations

intending to implement RRI practices. Embedding RRI and implementing structural
changes in the European R&I landscape requires building a strong evidence base,
disseminating tools and practices, supporting networks of practitioners, and effectively
monitoring progress towards goals. For instance, FP7’s MoRRI project implemented the
first RRI monitoring system in Europe and its successor Supper_MoRRI, supported by
SwafS, builds on this work. The portfolio of RRI projects as a whole is marked by a high
level of global collaboration, helping influence the development of policies at national

8
level and raising the EU’s profile as a global R&I actor. The ‘Pathways declaration’
emerging from one of the projects, signed by more than 13 projects, called for RRI to
remain a central objective in EU R&I and for the EU to continue to pursue its leading role
in this effort.

Citizen science and citizen engagement

In 2015, former Commissioner Moedas identified three strategic priorities, described in
Open innovation, Open science, Open to the world (the three O’s strategy). One
important dimension of open science is citizen science and in 2016, the Council3
recognised citizen science as an open science priority. Citizen science can make science
more socially relevant, accelerate and enable production of new scientific knowledge,
increase public awareness about science and ownership of policy making, as well as
increase the prevalence of evidence-based policy making.4

The 22 projects funded under this part of the SwafS portfolio are categorised as
‘deepening the evidence base, practice and training on co-design and co-creation’ (6
projects) and ‘doing citizen science’ (16 projects). In terms of the former, projects
produced a range of resources including practical guidance on running co-design and co-
creation activities, representing the state-of-the-art in the field. Moreover, several
projects developed sustainable networks. Notably, the EU-Citizen.Science Platform will
serve as a repository for citizen science resources and become a pan-European hub. The
‘doing citizen science’ project portfolio reached an impressive number of citizens, often
in innovative ways and engaging groups typically excluded from R&I processes.
Importantly, the diverse projects highlight the fact that citizen science approaches and
methodologies can apply across all areas of science from physics and technology
development to health and the social sciences and humanities.

Citizen science and science engagement more generally, is an ideal means to

democratise science, build trust in science, and leverage the vast societal intelligence
and capabilities to conduct excellent research and innovation. To fully reap these
benefits, important challenges need to be tackled: design and adoption of indicators to
measure outcomes; development of infrastructures and platforms to support cross-
European activities; training and capacity building; international mutual learning
activities; and finally, promotion of career and incentive systems embedding these
approaches within institutions so that they become a complementary part of the EU’s
R&I landscape.

Open access
It is widely recognised that making more research outputs openly accessible contributes
to better science and innovation5. Under Horizon 2020, any peer-reviewed scientific
publication, stemming from a funded project must be accessible online and free of
charge to any user. Furthermore, beneficiaries are encouraged to open up the underlying
data to maximise its re-use.

In support of the European Commission’s open access policy, SwafS projects focused on
text and data mining, innovative approaches to release and disseminate research results
and measure their impact, as well as training on open access and re-use of research
data. The lessons learned from the four open access projects point towards the need for
continued efforts in terms of improving the knowledge and skills of researchers on open
access matters.

3
Council conclusions on the transition towards an Open Science system, adopted by the Council at its 3470th meeting held on
27 May 2016
4
SwafS work programme 2018-2020
5
European Commission website for Open Science

9
Science Communication
Science communication informs citizens about science and innovation, opens up R&I to
society and facilitates citizens’ participation in activities and debate. In order for the
public to be on board for solutions to the challenges our society faces, there is a need to
build trust through clear and effective communication. With the science communication
topics running from 2018 to 2020, the European Commission wishes to build a
knowledge base in communicating science and improve science communication across
the EU’s Research and Innovation programme.

Projects are exploring the European landscape from various perspectives including a
mapping of training opportunities in science communication, analysing the actors
involved and content produced, as well as examining citizens’ information sources and
how these influence their perceptions. We expect to see guidelines on improving the
quality of science communication, indicators, as well as new ways of training those who
engage in science communication, including bloggers and social media commentators.
Citizens are central to science communication and to this end, we expect a better
understanding of what drives public trust in science communication as well as tools for
citizens to judge the soundness of scientific information.

Concluding remarks
Since 2014, the projects funded under ‘Science with and for Society’ contributed to its
primary aims set out in the EU Regulation establishing Horizon 2020, notably to
effectively build cooperation between science and society, recruit new talent for science
and pair scientific excellence with social awareness and responsibility.6 One of the key
ways of working towards these three SwafS objectives, and ensuring impact, is the
implementation of institutional changes7 in beneficiaries reflected in the SwafS Key
Performance Indicator: ‘Percentage of research organisations funded implementing
actions to promote Responsible Research and Innovation, and number of institutional
change measures adopted as a result’.8
The results of a sample of twelve RRI projects revealed that almost 250 individual
institutional change actions are implemented or in the process of being implemented by
this part of the SwafS portfolio9. Added to this, is the pioneer of institutional changes,
the Gender Equality Plans (GEPs), with 130 institutions (78%) having implemented or in
the process of implementing a GEP.
SwafS will well and truly surpass its target of 100 institutional changes in beneficiaries
by the end of Horizon 2020.
Consequently, SwafS stakeholders are in an excellent position to take a leading role in
supporting other entities envisaging institutional transformation. In conclusion,
inclusiveness on all levels underpins SwafS. RRI dimensions (gender, open access,
science education, ethics and public engagement), must be part of how research and
innovation is realised in all domains as well as its implications for governance. Horizon
Europe needs to leverage SwafS know-how and tap into the vast potential citizens and
society have to offer and continue to ensure effective cooperation between science and
society.

6
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
7
An institutional change is a change (with meaningful impact) in terms of how a beneficiary governs or structures itself in
relation to any of the RRI dimensions (public engagement, open access, gender, ethics, science education), and lasts beyond
the lifetime of project funding.
8
Horizon 2020 indicators
9
This data collection exercise did not cover projects dedicated to gender equality, ethics, or open access/open data, which, to
various degrees, focus also on institutional changes.

10
INTRODUCTION

The Commission working paper in November 2000 ‘Science, Society and the Citizen in
Europe’ established the basis for the debate on the relationship of science and
technology with society. On 26 June 2001, European research ministers adopted a
resolution on ‘science and society and on women in science’ inviting both EU Member
States and the European Commission to become more active in bringing science and
society closer. As a response to the June 2001 invitation, in December 2001 the ‘Science
and Society’ Action Plan was launched to set out a common strategy to make a better
connection between science and European citizens.
The 'Science and Society' theme under ‘Structuring the ERA’ in the Sixth Framework
Programme (FP6) became the first ever initiative of its kind on a European scale. With a
budget of EUR 88 million, its goal was to increase society’s acceptance of and
engagement with science and to rectify gender imbalances in research. The Science and
Society projects supported a wide range of studies and participatory events in areas
including gender, ethics, young people and scientific participation.10

In 2007, under the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological
Development (FP7), ‘Science and Society’ became ‘Science in Society (SiS)’ with the
main objective to foster public engagement and a sustained two-way dialogue between
science and civil society. Its budget almost tripled to 280 million euros. 183 projects
were funded with an average EC contribution of 1.6 million euros. SiS demonstrated a
clear European added value addressing science and society-relevant issues such as
governance, ethics, public participation, awareness raising, gender equality, science
education, open access to data, as well as dissemination of research and innovation.11
In 2012, the Communication on a reinforced ERA, included gender equality and gender
mainstreaming in R&I as one of its five core priorities12.

Fig. 1: Evolution of budget allocated to ‘Science with and for Society’ in EU FPs

10
Report of the Expert Group: Evaluation of the Sixth Framework Programmes for research and technological development
2002-2006
11
Study 'Commitment and coherence: Ex‐post‐evaluation of the 7th EU Framework Programme (2007‐2013)'
12
COM(2012) 392 final ‘A Reinforced European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and Growth’

11
In parallel, SiS led to the development of a concept reconciling the aspirations and
ambitions of European citizens and other Research and Innovation actors and towards
the end of FP7, lessons learnt gave birth to an approach known as Responsible Research
and Innovation (RRI), which was, on 21 November 2014, enshrined in the Rome
Declaration.

Under such a framework, all societal actors (researchers, citizens, policy makers,
businesses, civil society organisations, etc.) work together during the whole Research
and Innovation process in order to better align both the process and its outcomes, with
the values, needs and expectations of European society13. In practice, RRI14 is
implemented as a package, aiming to better engage society in Research and Innovation
activities, enabling easier access to scientific results, favouring a better uptake of the
gender and ethics dimensions in Research and Innovation content, and spreading good
practices in formal and informal education in science.

This concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) was tested and promoted
during the last years of FP7. While RRI activities are concentrated in the ‘Science and/in
Society’ parts, the intention was for the principles of RRI to be integrated into the overall
research strategy across the Framework Programme.

The ex-post evaluation of FP7 found that future Framework Programmes should involve
citizens and civil society organisations more substantially. They should engage citizens
and stakeholders in a dialogue about the purpose and benefits of research and the way it
is conducted, create incentives for science communication and support more strategic
measures of communication addressing different audiences, foster the linkages between
researchers, citizens and policy makers.

It recognised that citizen involvement in European research projects aims at increasing

trust, acceptance, and ownership of research, a positive perception of science, better
adoption of new knowledge and innovations, and improving relevance and creativity of
research outcomes.15

Following on from this, Horizon 2020 includes a dedicated part on ‘Science with and for
Society’. Its overall aim is to build effective cooperation between science and society, to
recruit new talent for science and to pair scientific excellence with social awareness and
responsibility.16 SwafS has grown substantially to reach EUR 462 million (see Fig. 1:
Evolution of budget allocated to ‘Science with and for Society’ in EU FPs), giving leverage to put RRI
and all its dimensions into practice in Europe, notably through 'institutional changes' (a
concept which was first piloted with Gender Equality Plans under FP7) in research and
innovation organisations. In parallel, gender, RRI, and social sciences and humanities
became cross-cutting issues promoted throughout the Horizon 2020 programme.17

New innovations are essential to Europe's international competitiveness. Europe cannot

thrive without including citizens in the process of ensuring the best match possible
between the immense potential achievements of science, and the needs and aspirations
of society.

It is essential to realise societally robust science and innovation policy in the context of
the European Research Area (ERA) and Innovation Union. The interim evaluation of
Horizon 2020 conveys that ‘Science with and for Society’ is highly relevant to the

13
Brochure ‘Responsible Research and Innovation: Europe's ability to respond to societal challenges’
14
The five dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation are gender equality, science education, open access/open data,
public engagement, and ethics.
15
Study 'Commitment and coherence: Ex‐post‐evaluation of the 7th EU Framework Programme (2007‐2013)'
16
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
17
European Commission website for SwafS

12
overarching challenges facing Europe and calls for greater support for citizen science and
user-led innovation.18

In response to this, Horizon Europe places citizens at its core. Like for FP6, where the
programme was embedded in ‘Structuring the ERA’, ‘Science with and for Society’ will be
embedded in the ‘Strengthening the European Research Area - Reforming and Enhancing
the European R&I system’. According to the legal basis establishing the framework for
Horizon Europe, ‘this part will also include activities on: […] modernising European
universities; supporting enhanced international cooperation; and science, society and
citizens’.19

The Horizon Europe Impact Assessment report states that the SwafS part on
'Accelerating and catalysing processes of institutional change' contributes to
implementing the RRI keys (public engagement, science education, ethics including
research integrity, gender equality, and open access) through institutional governance
changes in Research Funding and Performing Organisations (RFPOs) in an integrated
way.

Results contribute to the implementation of ERA priorities, a greater involvement of all

stakeholders in R&I, and a better and more sustainable engagement with society. Under
Horizon 2020, the key performance indicator for SwafS is the number of institutional
change actions which are analysed notably under the RRI chapter. This will be a key
bridge for SwafS as it moves into Horizon Europe.

The Horizon Europe legal basis sets out the aim of deepening the relationship between
science and society, maximising benefits of their interactions through gender equality
plans, diversity and inclusion strategies, and comprehensive approaches to institutional
changes. It calls on the future Framework Programme to engage and involve citizens and
civil society organisations in co-designing and co-creating responsible research and
innovation agendas and content, promoting science education, making scientific
knowledge publicly accessible, facilitating participation by citizens and civil society
organisations in its activities and promoting gender equality and strengthening the
gender dimension. It should do so both across the programme and through dedicated
activities under the 'Strengthening the European Research Area' part.

The engagement of citizens and civil society in research and innovation should be
coupled with public outreach activities to generate and sustain public support for Horizon
Europe. The programme should also seek to remove barriers and boost synergies
between science, technology, culture and the arts to obtain a new quality of sustainable
innovation, as well as support an inclusive approach to gender equality in research and
innovation20.

Further enriching the debate in the run-up to the start of Horizon Europe are two reports
on mission-oriented R&I, authored by Mariana Mazzucato, which provide directions for
how co-design, co-creation, and citizen involvement in implementation can play key
roles in responding to the challenges of our times21,22.
The ERA cannot grow in a sound manner without citizens at its core embracing science
education for all, promoting gender equality in our organisations, integrating ethical
aspects in the research design phase and further developing a coherent EU ethics and
integrity framework, opening up research and innovation to collective intelligence and

18
Interim evaluation of H2020
19
COM/2018/435 final 'Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe'
20
See supra note 19
21
'Mission-oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union', by Mariana Mazzucato
22
Governing Missions in the European Union, by Mariana Mazzucato

13
capabilities, building trust in science through targeted communication and ultimately
ensuring citizens are an integral part of the process to ensure better R&I.

The objective of this report is to convey the achievements of SwafS in Horizon 2020 to
serve as input for DG Research and Innovation to integrate society and citizens in
science under Horizon Europe, both across the future Framework Programme and in the
first work programmes falling under the 'Strengthening the European Research Area'
part.

The report commences with an outline of the methodological aspects of the analysis (the
frame for the analysis, data sources, the analytical approach and its limitations) followed
by nine thematic chapters. The first of these presents an overview of SwafS
implementation in Horizon 2020 in terms of both the evaluation process and project
implementation. In the eight following chapters, for each thematic domain, the policy
objectives and achievements are analysed and recommendations for the future
Framework Programme are conveyed. The final chapter presents concluding remarks as
a complement to the highlights outlined in the executive summary.

At the time of writing this report, the COVID-19 pandemic, came to the fore with
Member States going into lockdown, resulting in citizens across the EU being obliged to
stay at home. There was an imminent need for effective online tools and many SwafS
projects adopted contingency measures notably moving from physical to an online
format for project activities in order to sustain the bridge between science and society.

14
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE

Data sources

Calls for proposal: From the start of Horizon 2020 in 2014 until 2019, projects funded
under the calls foreseen in the respective SwafS work programmes are included in the
analysis (note that the calls dedicated to National Contact Points and those managed by
DG R&I, featuring under the ‘other actions’ section of the work programmes are
excluded):

Year Call
2014 SEAC (3 topics), ISSI (3 topics), GERI (3 topics), GARRI (4 topics)
23

SEAC (2 topics), ISSI (4 topics),

2015
GERI (2 topics), GARRI (4 topics)
2016 SwafS-25 (1 topic), Single call (12 topics)24
2017 Single call (15 topics)
Two-stage call (2 topics),
2018
Single call (14 topics)25
Two-stage call (2 topics)26,
2019
Single call (11 topics)
Two-stage call (2 topics),
2020
Single call (12 topics)27

Projects: The projects included are those funded under the calls listed in Table 1: Number
of SwafS projects in Horizon 2020, as of 15/05/2020. For the purposes of this analysis, projects are
grouped by theme in line with the report structure. In terms of data sources, the Grant
Agreement notably the Description of Action, project deliverables, review reports, project
web sites, project policy briefs as well as input from REA Project Officers over-seeing the
implementation of the projects have been the basis of the analysis.

Cluster events: REA-led events organised in collaboration with DG R&I, bringing

together projects funded under the same theme, pointed to some recommendations
which are taken up in this report. At the time of report writing, five such events were
held.

Year Thematic area

2018 Gender Equality Plan projects
2018 Ethics and research integrity
2019 Science education
2019 Citizen science
2020 Gender Equality Plan projects

23
Includes SEAC.03.2014 EURXASS topic managed by DG R&I
24
Includes SwafS-02-2016 ERA-NET Cofund topic managed by DG R&I
25
Includes SwafS-22-2018 topic on Outermost Regions managed by DG R&I
26
Grant Agreement Preparation on-going at the time of writing this report so these projects have not been included in the
report.
27
Evaluation still to be carried out at the time of writing this report.

15
Reports: Horizon 2020 legal basis, annual work programmes, Interim evaluation of
Horizon 2020, Impact Assessment for Horizon Europe are the primary references. Other
relevant documents for the thematic chapters are referenced in the respective chapters.

Feedback from the evaluation: Some recommendations made by experts during the
panel meetings and the independent observers in their reports are also included.

DG R&I policy officers provided input in terms of key reference documents as well as
the objectives of the respective themes and gave feedback on the draft chapters.
Table 1: Number of SwafS projects in Horizon 2020, as of 15/05/2020

SwafS
Res.
theme Science Science Gender Citizen Open Science
ethics & RRI TOTAL
# of educ. careers equality science access comm.
integrity
projects

Finished 4 13 14 8 12 5 3 - 59

Running (at
least 1 7 2 4 9 8 5 1 - 36
review held)
Running (1st
review to be 3 4 - 6 7 5 - 3 28
completed)
Just started
(Q4 2019 / 1 - 2 5 8 7 - 3 26
Q1 2020)
TOTAL GAs
signed, as of 15 19 20 28 35 22 4 6 149
15/05/2020
Forecast of
2019 stage-
228 & 2020
3 9 9 6 12 7 - 2 48
calls
TOTAL
SWAFS 18 28 29 34 47 29 4 9 197
H2020

Analytical approach

The approach to the analysis is qualitative in view of the breadth and complexity of the
themes of SwafS. Whenever possible, quantitative data has been included.

The analysis is primarily based on first-hand data on the currently running or completed
projects under the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme. Each project was
systematically assessed including the website, review reports and key deliverables.
Deliverables singled out in the report are those deemed to be particularly pertinent by
the project consortia (highlighted in project website) and/or by the independent expert
involved in the project review and responsible REA Project Officer (highlighted in the
review report). Policy and other pertinent reports have been consulted in order to
integrate this analysis in a broader perspective.

In the project portfolio table and maps, a distinction is made between the coordinator
(i.e. the entity coordinating the project consortium) and other partners. Note that ‘other

28
Grant agreement preparation is on-going for eight projects selected for funding for both of the SwafS-2019 stage-2 topics
which are not included in this report.

16
partners’ includes project beneficiaries that are signatory to the grant agreement and
does not include other entities e.g. third parties, that may be involved in project
activities.

Finally, note that the project budget corresponds to the requested EU contribution.

Limits of the analysis

The main limitation of this study lies in the lack of complete data as many projects have
not yet concluded. The analysis was carried out prior to the 2020 evaluation, projects
resulting from the 2019 call commenced close to the time of drafting this report and
those funded following the 2018 call had not yet been subject to their first review.

17
1. OVERVIEW OF SWAFS IMPLEMENTATION IN HORIZON 2020

1.1. Evaluation process

Since the start of Horizon 2020, SwafS has organised calls for proposal on an annual
basis.

As indicated in the introduction, the underlying objective of all these calls is to build
effective co-operation between science and society; Foster the recruitment of new talent
for science; Pair scientific excellence with social awareness and responsibility 29.

The Horizon 2020 specific programme30 outlines eight activity lines for SwafS:

 Attractiveness of scientific careers;

 Gender equality;
 Integration of citizens’ interests and values in research and innovation (R&I);
 Formal and informal science education;
 Accessibility and use of research results;
 Governance for the advancement of responsible research and innovation and
promotion of an ethics framework for research and innovation;
 Anticipation of potential environmental, health and safety impacts;
 Improved knowledge on science communication

For the SwafS WP 2014-2015, four separate calls for proposal were organised each year,
with a common call deadline, and focused on:

 Making science education and careers attractive for young people (SEAC);
 Promoting gender equality in research and innovation (GERI);
 Integrating society in science and innovation (ISSI);
 Developing governance for the advancement of responsible research and innovation
(GARRI)

As of 2016, the structure of the SwafS work programme moved from four distinct calls to
individual topics under a single call. Under this new approach, the SwafS WP 2016-2017,
focused on the following main orientations:

 Institutional Change to Support Responsible Research and Innovation in Research

Performing and Funding Organisations
 Embedding Responsible Research and Innovation in Horizon 2020 Research &
Innovation
 Strengthening the Science with and for Society Knowledge-Base
 Developing Inclusive, Anticipatory Governance for Research & Innovation

The SwafS WP 2018-2020 focused on the following five strategic orientations:

Accelerating and catalysing processes of institutional change;

 Accelerating and catalysing processes of institutional change;

 Stepping up the support to Gender Equality in Research & Innovation policy;
 Building the territorial dimension of SwafS partnerships;

29
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
30
See supra note 29

18
 Exploring and supporting citizen science, and
 Building the knowledge base for SwafS.

Table 2: SwafS proposals data in Horizon 2020shows the number of proposals

submitted, evaluated and funded as well as the corresponding EC grant amount and the
volume of evaluation review requests. From the outset, it is clear that there is a strong
interest in the SwafS fields peaking in the final year of Horizon 2020 with 407 proposals
submitted.
Over the course of Horizon 2020, the pattern tends to be lower submission rates in the
first year of the work programme compared to the following year. Furthermore,
submission rates were lower overall for the 2016-2017 work programme topics
Table 2: SwafS proposals data in Horizon 2020

compared to the first (2014-2015) and final (2018-2020) work programmes in Horizon
2020. In 2020, the number of proposals submitted peaked with over 400 consortia
putting forward proposals and bringing the total number of proposals submitted under
Horizon 2020 up to almost 2,000.
Looking more closely at the 2019 call, for which the evaluation is completed, compared
to the previous year, the number of proposals increased by 56%. This call includes 13
topics, two of which are subject to a two-stage evaluation (see 1.1.2).
Science Education remains the most popular topic with the highest number of proposals
(93). Meanwhile, Citizen Science is the topic with the biggest growth in terms of
proposals (78), which more than doubled compared to 2018 (33).

In the 2019 call, approximately one third of the topics identified international
cooperation as particularly pertinent including one of the gender topics, dedicated to

19
dialogue with third countries. With applicants from 85 different countries from continents
across the globe including Asia, Australia, Africa, South and North America, Science with
and for Society follows the spirit of ‘open to the world’. Looking at Europe in particular,
the map below shows, applicants come from right across the continent.

Applicants represent stakeholders from all parts of the quadruple helix model 31, including
Civil Society Organisations (falling under the ‘other’ category in pie chart above) with the
relative majority being educational institutes.

Fig. 2: Applicants for SwafS-2019 single call for proposals

EDU Higher or Secondary Education

RES Research Organisations
PUB Public Bodies
IND Industry
SME Small and Medium Enterprise
OTH All other entries

31
The quadruple helix model considers particular services, products and solutions as being co-identified, co-developed and co-
created through co-operation between industry, government (e.g. policy makers and institutions), universities and society
(e.g. citizens and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs).

20
After the 2014 evaluation, DG R&I delegated the management of SwafS to REA Unit B5.
Since 2015, REA Unit B5 manages the evaluation and implementation of SwafS projects
and to this end, continues to work in close cooperation with DG R&I responsible for the
policy making and drafting of the work programmes.

In line with Horizon 2020 practices, three independent evaluators evaluate each
proposal, selected for their expertise while the overall panel is well-balanced in terms of
gender (i.e. at least 40% of males and females), geography and sector of activity.

With regard to the quality of the evaluation process, independent observers examine the
fairness of the evaluation procedure. In the 2019 SwafS evaluation, the observer
reported, ‘that the design, planning and execution of the evaluation process was very
robust and entirely consistent with peer review principles of transparency, equality of
treatment and absence of conflicts of interest.’ The evaluators themselves echoed this
observation in the panel meetings in their invitation to EC services to better publicise the
robustness of the evaluation procedure.

A quantitative indicator of the quality of the evaluation is the number of evaluation

review requests filed. Applicants may file a complaint on the evaluation of their proposal
from a procedural point-of-view. Over the course of the last 5 years, 0.8% of applicants
(12) filed such a complaint.

An independent Evaluation Review Committee, consisting of REA staff (not involved in

the evaluation) and DG R&I staff, assesses each evaluation review request.

The outcome shows that for 10 out of the 12 evaluation review requests, the respective
Evaluation Review Committees found no grounds for the complaint. For the remaining
two (0.1%), the Committees found some grounds for the complaint. However, this did
not have an impact in terms of the proposal’s possibility for funding and hence a re-
evaluation of the proposal was not required.

1.1.1. Cross-cutting issues

The legislative basis for Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, article 14, lays out fifteen
‘cross-cutting issues’ for which linkages and interfaces shall be implemented across and
within the priorities of Horizon 2020. For many challenges, solutions rely on element(s)
from this indicative list, and cut across the multiple specific objectives of Horizon 2020 32,
hence the term cross-cutting issues.

Since the start of Horizon 2020, cross-cutting issues have featured in all SwafS topics.
To this end, the corresponding work programme topic incorporates the cross-cutting
issue in its description and ‘cross-cutting priorities’ are listed in the topic page published
on the Funding and Tenders Portal.

In terms of the practical implementation, the way in which each cross-cutting issue
features in Horizon 2020 varies. For example, ‘widening participation across the Union in
research and innovation and helping to close the research and innovation divide in
Europe’ has its own dedicated programme with targeted actions. Other cross-cutting
issues, for example ‘social and economic sciences and humanities’, ‘cooperation with
third countries’, ‘responsible research and innovation including gender’, are identified in
the work programme text.

The particularities of the cross-cutting issues relevant for SwafS and how these are
implemented in the evaluation process are highlighted below:

32
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020

21
 Gender equality concerns all parts of Horizon 2020, firstly, human resources i.e.
balance between women and men in research teams and secondly, content i.e.
applicants are required to describe, where relevant, how sex and/or gender analysis is
taken into account in the project’s content. ‘Gender-flagged’ topics refer to the later
i.e. those with an explicit gender dimension. Gender dimension appears in the
proposal template for Research and Innovation Actions (RIAs)/Innovation Actions
(IAs)/Coordination and Support Actions (CSAs) (‘Where relevant, describe how the
gender dimension, i.e. sex and/or gender analysis is taken into account in the
project’s content.’) and is part of the evaluation sub-criterion for RIAs/IAs (‘where
relevant, use of … gender dimension in research and innovation content’) although
not for CSAs;

 Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) as a concept in itself does not

feature in the proposal template or in the evaluation sub-criterion. If one of the five
dimensions of RRI (public engagement, gender, ethics, open access, science
education) is pertinent, then the topic is flagged for RRI. The FAQ published on the
Portal points to the need for applicants to consider how to involve societal actors in
the activities or in the overall approach in one or more of the five RRI dimensions;

 Regarding cooperation with third countries, while not featuring in the proposal
template or evaluation criteria, there is a standard sentence on ‘international
cooperation’ which should appear in the work programme text for topics flagged for
this aspect: ‘In line with the strategy for EU international cooperation in research and
innovation (COM (2012)479), international cooperation is encouraged’;

 Social and economic sciences and humanities are not referred to explicitly in the
proposal template or evaluation sub-criterion. Regardless of whether or not the topic
is flagged for ‘social and economic sciences and humanities, applicants for RIAs/IAs
are invited to consider the implicitly related ‘inter-disciplinary considerations’ in the
proposal template (‘Identify any inter-disciplinary considerations and, where relevant,
use of stakeholder knowledge’) and this aspect is part of the evaluation sub-criterion
for these action types: ‘Appropriate consideration of interdisciplinary approaches’;

 Open science includes open access to scientific publications and to research data,
and features in the proposal template, and implicitly in the evaluation sub-criterion in
relation to management of research data and subsequently as a contractual obligation
(Article 29 of the Grant Agreement). In addition, ‘open science’ includes opening the
R&I system towards society as a whole which is neither referred to explicitly in the
proposal template nor the evaluation sub-criterion yet should be addressed by
applicants for topics flagged for ‘open science’.

For each cross-cutting issue identified as pertinent for a given topic, a corresponding
reference or sentence is included in the work programme description.

The standard briefing slides for experts indicate, ‘If cross-cutting issues are explicitly
mentioned in the scope of the call or topic, and not properly addressed, you must reflect
this in the assessment of the relevant criterion and the corresponding score. A successful
proposal is expected to address them, or convincingly explain why not relevant in a
particular case.’ Consequently, cross-cutting issues are attributed a certain, although
undefined, weight in the evaluation process which is left to the remit of the evaluators.

22
 Fig. 3: RRI flagging across Horizon 2020 projects

(Source: DG R&I Unit G.4 ‘Open Science’ internal analysis)

While the implementation of the cross-cutting issues in the evaluation process presented
its challenges, the result has nonetheless been very positive in terms of ensuring greater
take-up of these matters right across the Horizon 2020 programme.

In Fig. 3: RRI flagging across Horizon 2020 projects we can see that across the Horizon 2020
programme, projects are following an RRI approach i.e. involving the relevant
stakeholders in their activities or approach in order to better align R&I to the values,
needs and expectations of society.

SwafS stands out with 80% of its projects integrating RRI. Looking at other
programmes, Mobility 4 EU is an example from Societal Challenge 4 dealing with
transport which seeks to draw out a vision for Europe's transport system in 2030 along
with recommendations for R&I through a participatory and multi-stakeholder approach.
Another example is HackAIR (Leadership in Enabling and Industrial Technologies - LEIT)
which creates and tests an open platform to enable citizens to generate and publish
outdoor air pollution data.

Fig. 4: Gender flagging in Horizon 2020 shows that over the course of Horizon 2020, the
prevalence of topics for which the gender dimension is deemed relevant increased from
16% in the first work programme 2014-2015 to 35% in the last year of Horizon 2020
compared to 71% in the first SwafS work programme to 93% in 2020.

While Horizon 2020 is open to the world, for some topics there is a clear interest and
benefit in engaging in international cooperation. In those topics, international
cooperation is encouraged.

23
 Fig. 4: Gender flagging in Horizon 2020

SwafS projects have embraced international cooperation and involve partners from
around the world including for example South Africa (7), the US (6), Brazil (5), China
(5), Argentina (4), Canada (4), India (3) and Japan (1). In many cases, the examples
are more telling than the numbers.

As highlighted in the Research Ethics and Research Integrity chapter, the TRUST team
supported the development of the first code of ethics by one of the world’s oldest
indigenous populations, the San of southern Africa who now have their own rules for
researchers intending to study their community and people: the SAN Code for Research
Ethics.

Furthermore, NUCLEUS offered the Institute of Wetland Research in China the

opportunity to test RRI practices with the intention of these becoming established
practices for its researchers. Furthermore, thanks to NUCLEUS, the South African
Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity’s integrated RRI across many areas of its business
including in its strategic planning to encourage a sustained culture of RRI.

1.1.2. Two-stage evaluation process

The aim of the two-stage process is to ease the burden for applicants in the initial stage
of the proposal preparation although the overall period for the evaluation extends by
approximately eight months. In stage 1 of the two-stage procedure, applicants submit a
short proposal (maximum 10 pages) and, like the evaluation criteria, focuses only on
'excellence' and part of 'impact', notably in relation to the expected impact statement in
the work programme.

Successful stage-1 proposals passing the thresholds (see Annex H of the General
Annexes to the work programme), receive general common feedback and are invited to
stage-2, which is the same as the single proposal procedure albeit that the full proposal
must be consistent with the short proposal submitted in stage-1.

2018 saw the introduction of the two-stage evaluation process for SwafS in view of the
traditionally over-subscribed topic, science education (3% success rate in 2015).

For science education, 67 applicants submitted a proposal to stage-1 (call deadline April
2018) of which 15 were invited to submit a full proposal in stage-2 (call deadline
November 2018), 4 proposals were finally selected for funding (informed March 2019)
and projects commenced in summer 2019.

24
A new bottom-up topic on ‘building the SwafS knowledge base’ was also included in the
two-stage call as it was expected that such an open topic would result in a large volume
of proposals which as it transpired was not the case.

1.1.3. Recommendations

Expand the ‘Impact’ section of the proposal template in order to give more guidance to
applicants in the design of the impact strategy in terms of describing the long path from
outcome to the desired impact.

Like most other programmes, an indication of the project duration for the SwafS topics
would be useful for applicants and would facilitate implementation in terms of planning
for example joint cluster reviews to facilitate feedback to DG R&I with respect to policy
work.

1.1.3.1. Cross-cutting issues

In terms of the proposal evaluation process, there is a need to better clarify for
applicants that cross-cutting issues or their equivalent in Horizon Europe are an integral
part of the evaluation process and ensure a harmonised approach in terms of their
implementation. For any elements which the Commission wishes to address across the
Horizon Europe Framework Programme, a standard sentence should feature in the
corresponding work programme text (like for international cooperation), clearly
explaining the meaning together with a footnote referencing the FAQ guidance for
applicants and experts.

The cross-cutting issues are not part of the work programme published and are listed in
the Funding and Tenders Portal at the end of the topic description with no direct link to
the corresponding sentence(s) in the work programme topic/call description.
Furthermore, it is possible to add or remove cross-cutting issues right up to the call
deadline without any automatic notification to applicants. For ‘cross-cutting priorities’ or
their equivalent in Horizon Europe, there should be coherence between the official
published work programme and the topic page in the Funding and Tenders Portal
(currently ‘cross-cutting priorities’ only appear in the Portal).

Furthermore, as appropriate, in order to reinforce the importance of a particular

element, for example citizen science, explicit reference in the proposal template and in
the evaluation sub-criterion is necessary as is the case already for the gender dimension.

1.1.3.2. Two-stage evaluation process

The volume of submissions in past calls should be a basis for determining whether to opt
for the 2-stage evaluation procedure.

The work programme General Annexes (eligibility section) should reflect the provision
that confirmed substantial changes between stages 1 and 2 will result in the proposal’s
ineligibility. The modalities for determining what constitutes a substantial difference
between stage-1 and stage-2 proposals should be integrated in the online guidance for
applicants when completing this section of the proposal form.

Given that in stage-1 impact is partially evaluated, a weight should be applied for the
excellence criterion for which all elements are evaluated.

The stage-1 evaluation procedure should only take place if the volume of proposals
submitted in stage-1 is sufficiently high with respect to the thresholds set (see Annex H

25
of the General Annexes to the work programme) to justify this additional evaluation
phase.

Applicants invited to stage-2 receive the Evaluation Summary Report from stage-1 at the
same time as they receive that for stage-2. Applicants should only receive the Evaluation
Summary Report for the full proposal (stage-2) to avoid possible contradictions given
that both stages are independent.

1.2. Project implementation

SwafS counts a total budget of EUR 462 million in Horizon 2020. Since the start of
Horizon 2020, 150 projects have been funded amounting to a total budget of EUR 319
million, all are managed by REA Unit B.5 except for three which are managed by DG
R&I.

SwafS projects are typically composed of large consortia with an average of

approximately 11 partners per project. The duration tends to vary with the shortest
project duration being 2 years and the longest project extending to 5 years while the
average project duration is 3 years.

In terms of their nature, 30% are Research and Innovation Actions (RIA) focused on
generating new knowledge while approximately 70% of funded projects are Coordination
and Support Actions (CSA) tending to focus on ‘accompanying measures’ including for
example networking, mutual learning exercises and awareness-raising type activities.
The exception is GENDER-NET Plus, an ERA-NET COFUND action, managed by DG
Research and Innovation which aims at funding research projects promoting the
integration of sex and gender analysis into research at an international level.

The REA Unit B.5 signs grants with consortia within the legal deadline of 8 months from
the call deadline. Project officers partake in kick-off meetings and closely follow the
project during the lifetime. Each project has defined reporting periods that conclude with
a review meeting, the formal approval of the deliverables and the payment for the
activities carried out. The REA calls upon the support of an independent expert to review
the deliverables and reports. The quality of deliverables is closely monitored notably
those that are public and are automatically published once approved.

The REA works closely with DG Research and Innovation to ensure policy makers are
kept abreast of any feedback from the project relevant for their policy monitoring or
future policy making activities.

DG Research and Innovation and the REA promote networking between projects to
encourage sharing of best practices and to encourage projects to build on the available
know-how. The REA and DG R&I have developed this practice by organising thematic
one-day cluster events in Brussels. These cluster events are organised in co-creation
mode with the projects and since 2018 five such events were organised including for
ethics, gender, science education and citizen science projects.

Liaising with other SwafS projects was formally encouraged in the 2018-2020 work
programme which foresees the inclusion of ‘additional dissemination obligations’ in
Article 29.1 of the grant agreement for certain topics. This provision requires consortia to
share their strategies and methodologies from the outset with a view to reaping the full
benefits of synergies. Project co-ordinators have demonstrated strong willingness to
work together in organising joint communication channels, events, meetings, and co-
ordinating content-related activities. This grant condition was a key element in terms of
aiming to build a knowledge and collaboration ecosystem. The results have been positive
in the territorial and citizen portfolios for example where projects are pro-actively liaising
with each other. The Super_MoRRI project gathered 14 other SwafS projects together at

26
its annual event in Leiden in January 2020.33 This ‘additional dissemination obligation’
condition should be used more extensively in the future.

1.2.1. Recommendations

The legal basis for Horizon 2020, Article 31, includes an obligation to carry out an annual
monitoring of Horizon 2020.34 The scope of the monitoring includes information and data
on progress towards the cross-cutting issues.

Progress is measured through a number of policy indicators, including the cross-cutting

issues. Some projects are already flagged for the indicator or cross-cutting issue in
question from the call definition stage while for others, Project Officers report on these
during the grant agreement preparation phase in accordance with the project specifics.
These indicators should be verified and if needed updated during the project lifetime,
notably at the review stage.

As stated in the introduction, the key performance indicator for SwafS is the number of
institutional change actions: ‘Percentage of research organisations funded implementing
actions to promote Responsible Research and Innovation, and number of institutional
change measures adopted as a result’.35 At present, the IT Grant Management system
does not align with EC policy in that a number of elements mentioned in the 'Science for
Society' tab do not fit under the definition of an institutional change.

Furthermore, guidance in the IT system is lacking for project coordinators in terms of

how to complete this section. REA B5 unit launched an exercise to gather this data for a
large part of the SwafS portfolio, in close co-operation with DG R&I unit ‘Open Science’
(analysed in chapter 6 ‘Institutional changes towards responsible research and
innovation’).

This is an example of how REA Unit B5 monitors the implementation of projects and their
impact in order to provide DG R&I with the necessary input for designing future policies.

For Horizon Europe, the Grant Management IT system should be adapted in order to
provide guidance to coordinators on the meaning of future indicators and guide them
through the steps to ensure that the data collected is reliable for the Commission’s
monitoring and reporting purposes.

33
Super MoRRI annual event, January 2020
34
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
35
Horizon 2020 indicators

27
2. RESEARCH ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Ethics is an integral part of all research activities funded by the European Union, and
ethical compliance is essential to guarantee research excellence36,37,38. All projects
carried out under Horizon 2020 must comply with ethical principles and relevant
national, EU and international legislation, for example the Charter of Fundamental Rights
of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Furthermore, the European Commission promotes adherence to the highest standards of

research integrity across Europe.

In December 2015, in its Conclusions on Research Integrity, the Council of the European
Union acknowledged that research integrity is key to achieving research excellence and
that measures should be taken to prevent research misconduct and invited the
Commission and all stakeholders to define and implement policies to this effect. As a
result, the revised provisions in the Horizon 2020 Model Grant Agreement explicitly call
for beneficiaries to respect the principles and practices included in the European Code of
Conduct for Research Integrity (EcoC). The Commission played a key role in the revision
of this Code in 2017 and the process was led by All European Academies (ALLEA) in
cooperation with stakeholders including industry, academia and research funders.
SwafS has financed a number of projects aimed at fostering and promoting a better
understanding of ethics and research integrity issues and supporting the research
community in this area. The funding of SwafS projects and the ethics appraisal process
in Horizon 2020 are helping to raise awareness among researchers in academia and
industry as well as relevant actors on the importance of ethics and research integrity as
a means of promoting excellence in research.

These projects constitute a range of initiatives focused on strengthening the capacity of

research organisations, researchers, ethics committees, research integrity offices and
funding bodies.

Furthermore, these projects contributed to building a governance framework for

research ethics (RE) and research integrity (RI). A community of RE and RI actors was
set up to facilitate exchange of knowledge and experience and to leverage improvements
in the existing mechanisms in place to ensure RE and RI (see 2.3.1).
Currently, interesting developments concern the definition of new guidelines and codes
in areas dealing with new technologies with potentially high social and economic impact
and potentially affecting human rights.

Artificial intelligence, robotics, human genomics and human enhancement offer benefits
for both individuals and society. However, they also raise complex ethical issues that
need to be addressed at EU level.

There is a pressing need to provide ethical responses and practical options which support
innovation, the research community, facilitate the work of ethics committees and take
into consideration the expectations of society.

Guidelines are currently being developed taking into account the ethical implications of
these domains with the active involvement of relevant stakeholders. A number of these
guidelines are expected to be published during the course of 2020.

36
H2020 Rules for Participation, Art. 14 (Ethics Reviews)
37
H2020 Regulation of Establishment, Art. 19 (Ethical principles)
38
H2020 Model Grant Agreement, Art. 34 (Ethics and Research Integrity)

28
2.1. Policy objectives

According to Annex I – Part V of the Specific Programme Council Decision of

3/12/201339, the policy objective on Research Ethics and Research Integrity in Horizon
2020 is twofold:

 Integrate society in science and innovation issues, policies and activities in order to
integrate citizens' interests and values and to increase the quality, relevance, social
acceptability and sustainability of research and innovation outcomes in various fields
of activity from social innovation to areas such as biotechnology and nanotechnology;

 Develop the governance for the advancement of responsible research and innovation
by all stakeholders (researchers, public authorities, industry and civil society
organisations), which is sensitive to society’s needs and demands, and promote an
ethics framework for research and innovation.

More specific policy objectives have been identified in the various topics in the work
programmes:

 Examine research integrity and research misconduct and enhance existing codes of
conduct;

 Strengthen the EU’s capacity to uphold the highest ethical standards, promote
research integrity and minimise misconduct by promoting best practices;

 Reinforce synergies between European networks active in research integrity and

research ethics;

 Promote innovative methods for teaching ethics and research integrity;

 Map the ethics and research integrity normative frameworks;

 Analyse the ethics of technologies with high socio-economic impact and human rights
relevance and elaborate appropriate guidance documents and area-specific codes
which will allow ethics to be perceived as a driver of excellent research and
innovation and not a red tape measure;

 Examine methods to reduce the risk of exporting unethical practices to third

countries.

2.2. Project portfolio

Research Ethics & Research Integrity were the main themes in topics throughout Horizon
2020’s three work programmes, resulting in 15 funded projects with a combined budget
of EUR 40.740 million (2020 call not included in which three projects are expected to be
funded in the area of organoids, ethics of technologies with high socio-economic impact,
and responsible open science in relation to ethics and integrity).

39
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
40
The slight difference in the total figure calculated on basis of budget allocated to each project in table 3 is due to rounding

29
 Fig. 5: Number of coordinators in Member State (MS)

Fig. 6: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 7: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

All the topics are Coordination and Support Actions (CSA) by nature, which, in Horizon
2020 terms implies that they are not research projects per se, but in the case of ethics
focus rather on the institutional framework, awareness raising, training and capacity
building in general.

30
 Table 3: Research Ethics and Research Integrity project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
GARRI-5-2014 Ethics in research: promoting Integrity (CSA)
STICHTING EU: EE, BE, DE, UK,
01-09-2015 printeger.e
PRINTEGER 2.0 M€ KATHOLIEKE NL IT, NL
31-08-2018 u
UNIVERSITEIT AC: NO
GARRI-6-2014 Reducing the risk of exporting non ethical practices to third countries (CSA)
EU: FR(3), BE, NL
01-10-2015 UNIVERSITY OF trust-
TRUST 2.1 M€ UK AC: CH(2)
31-12-2018 CENTRAL LANCASHIRE project.eu/
TC: IN, ZA(3), KE

GARRI-9-2015 Estimating the costs of research misconduct and the socio-economic benefit of research integrity (CSA)

INSTITUT DES HAUTES cordis.euro

01-06-2016 ETUDES pa.eu/proj
DEFORM 1.0 M€ FR EU: EL
31-07-2018 ECONOMIQUES ET ect/id/710
COMMERCIALES 246
GARRI-10-2015 European Ethics and Research Integrity Network in Horizon 2020 (CSA)
RHEINISCHE
EU: AT(2), DE(2),
01-09-2016 FRIEDRICH-
ENERI 1.5 M€ DE NL, LT, FI, EL, DK eneri.eu
31-10-2019 WILHELMS-
AC: NO
UNIVERSITAT BONN
SwafS-16-2016 Mapping the Ethics and Research Integrity Normative Framework (CSA)

EU: DE(2), BE, HR,

01-05-2017 embassy.s
EnTIRE 3.8 M€ STICHTING VUMC NL IE, ES, HU(2), UK
30-04-2021 cience
AC: NO

SwafS-17-2016 The Ethics of informed consent in novel treatment including a gender perspective (CSA)
FUNDACION PARA EL
FOMENTO DE LA
INVESTIGACION i-
01-05-2017 EU: ES(2), IT(3), UK
I-CONSENT 3.1 M€ SANITARIA Y ES consentpro
31-03-2021 (2), FR(1), BE
BIOMEDICA DE LA ject.eu
COMUNITAT
VALENCIANA
SwafS-18-2016 The Ethics of technologies with high socio-economic impact and Human Rights relevance (CSA)
EU: UK, SE, PL, DE,
01-10-2017 UNIVERSITEIT sienna-
SIENNA 4.0 M€ NL ES, EL, FR
31-03-2021 TWENTE project.eu
TC: BR, CN, ZA
SwafS-21-2017 Promoting integrity in the use of research results in evidence based policy: a focus on non-medical
research (CSA)
FONDATION EU: UK, EL(2), EE,
01-05-2018 prores-
PRO-RES 2.8 M€ EUROPEENNE DE LA FR HR, BE(2), FR(2),
30-04-2021 project.eu
SCIENCE IT(2), DE, IE
SwafS-22-2017 The Ethical dimensions of IT technologies: a European perspective focusing on security and human rights
(CSA)
01-05-2018 DE MONTFORT EU: UK(2), NL(3), project-
SHERPA 2.9 M€ UK
31-10-2021 UNIVERSITY DE, CY(2), BE, FI sherpa.eu
UNIVERSIDAD DEL
EU: ES(3), DK, BE,
01-11-2018 PAIS VASCO/ EUSKAL
PANELFIT 2.8 M€ ES AT, DE(4), IT panelfit.eu
31-10-2021 HERRIKO
AC: CH
UNIBERTSITATEA
SwafS-27-2017 Implementing a European Train-the-trainers initiative with regard to Ethics and Research Integrity (CSA)
EU: BE, HR, AT, DE,
01-06-2018 embassy.s
VIRT2UE 2.8 M€ STICHTING VUMC NL EL, FI, LV, PT, IT, NL
31-05-2021 cience
AC: NO, TR
SwafS-02-2018 Innovative methods for teaching ethics and research integrity (CSA)
01-01-2019 FACHHOCHSCHULE EU: DK, ES(2), BG, path2integ
Path2Integrity 2.5 M€ DE
31-12-2021 COBURG DE(3), PL rity.eu
EU: IE, DK, PT, HU,
01-01-2019 UNIVERSITEIT h2020inte
INTEGRITY 2.5 M€ NL LT, SI, NL, SE AC:
31-12-2021 UTRECHT grity.eu
CH(2)
SwafS-03-2018 Developing Research Integrity standard operating procedures (CSA)
EU: NL(2), HR,
01-01-2019
SOPs4RI 4.0 M€ AARHUS UNIVERSITET DK UK(2), AT, EL, IE, sops4ri.eu
31-12-2022
BE(2), IT, PL
SwafS-16-2019 Ethics of Innovation: the challenge of new interaction modes (CSA)
EU: DK, NL, FR, UK, cordis.euro
ZENTRUM FUR
01-01-2020 BE(2), DE(2), ES, pa.eu/proj
PRO-ETHICS 3.0 M€ SOZIALE INNOVATION AT
31-12-2023 CZ, AT, RO, LT ect/id/872
GMBH
AC: NO 441

31
2.3. Achievements

The main achievements and ongoing developments of the Research Ethics (RE) and
Research Integrity (RI) projects can be clustered around the following four categories:

 RE/RI community building;

 Capacity building and awareness raising;
 Development of frameworks and Standard Operating Procedures ;
 Policy drive for ethics in technologies with high socio-economic impact (such as
Artificial Intelligence (AI), genomics etc.)

Projects’ outcomes have been achieved based on an inclusive approach in line with
Responsible Research and Innovation principles by involving societal actors, ethics
committees, research integrity offices and relevant stakeholders throughout the entire
process.

The European Commission identified so far two projects as particular success stories in
relation to the quality and quantity of exploitable material, their dissemination activities
and their impact on the research communities in Europe and beyond: TRUST and
PRINTEGER while projects such as SIENNA, SHERPA and PANELFIT lead the way in
research cooperation in emerging technologies and data protection.

2.3.1. RE/RI community building

2.3.1.1. Building a RI/RI community at European level

In the work programme 2014-2015, the topic ‘European Ethics and Research Integrity
Network in Horizon 2020’ resulted in the funding of ENERI. ENERI carried out a series of
activities to support research ethics committees (RECs) and research integrity offices
(RIOs) active in all Member States and Horizon 2020 Associated Countries.

The aim of ENERI was to strengthen the existing networks, namely the European
Network of Ethics Committees (EUREC) and the European Network of Research Integrity
Offices (ENRIO), while at the same time enhancing their collaboration. EUREC, ENRIO,
the All European Academies (ALLEA) and other SwafS RE and RI projects, joined forces
to form strong ties between RE and RI and set up a unique European Network of
Research Ethics and Research Integrity, also called ENERI.

This network resulted in improving its competences, enhancing interactions, promoting

harmonisation and synergies as well as raising awareness. An array of activities have
been carried-out including joint workshops, joint events and collaborative work resulting
in tools of common interest in education and training such as the RE and RI e-Manual
and the RI decision tree (presented in 2.3.2.2 below).

Moreover, an e-Community of 165 RE/RI experts has been set up to encourage sharing
of best practices and a set of indicators identified to assess the competences required for
qualified expert membership. This database is currently integrated in the Commission’s
SINAPSE portal, to ensure its sustainability after the project’s conclusion.

With a view to further strengthening the RE and RI community, the REA and DG R&I
organised a cluster event in Brussels on 1 June 2018 grouping 11 SwafS Research Ethics
and Research Integrity projects. The aim of this event to establish project synergies and
develop project-specific cooperation plans was realised.

32
Following up on this initiative, DG R&I encouraged SHERPA, PANELFIT and SIENNA to
join forces in relation to the new technologies domain. A video produced bears witness to
this collaboration and explores the ethical, legal and human rights questions surrounding
information and communication technologies, big data, artificial intelligence and smart
information systems.

Jointly with DG R&I, SIENNA and SHERPA organised a workshop for EC policy makers
and REA project officers dedicated to ethics and artificial intelligence: Foreseeing the
Impact and Shaping the Future.

Path2Integrity, INTEGRITY, VIRT2UE and ENTIRE collaborate on a regular basis with a

view to jointly producing RE and RI education material and development of training
curricula.

2.3.1.2. Building a RE/RI community open to the world

Taking into account the progressive globalisation of research activities, international

collaboration was encouraged by the European Commission, and was explicitly
mentioned in the most recent SwafS work programme 2018-2020 in line with former
Commissioner Moedas three strategic priorities, Open innovation, Open science, Open to
the world (the three O’s strategy). As a result, international partners have been involved
in projects to a certain extent (see Fig. 7) (e.g. UNESCO’s involvement in TRUST).

The progressive globalisation of research brought with it new ethical challenges linked to
the existence of varying ethics review practices across countries and an increased risk
that research with sensitive ethical issues is conducted by European organisations
outside the EU in a way that would not be accepted in Europe from an ethical point of
view. The European Commission refers to such practices as ‘ethics dumping’41.

The 2014 work programme, topic ‘Reducing the risk of exporting non ethical practices to
third countries’ focused on addressing the risk of ‘ethics dumping’ and identifying
mechanisms to minimise such practices.

The TRUST project, funded under this topic, developed tools and a comprehensive global
code of conduct to guide researchers from high-income countries when undertaking work
in low- and middle-income settings.

In collaboration with UNESCO, researchers from the EU, Africa and India, industry
(pharmaceutical companies) and local communities the Global Code of Conduct for
Research in Resource – Poor Settings (referred to as Global Code of Conduct) was also
developed.

41
European Commission website for Ethics

33
 © iStock, 2020.

This innovative Global Code of Conduct is structured around four values and has the
ambition of moving from ‘procedural-based ethics’ (e.g. checklist exercise) to ‘ethics in
practice’ and ‘ethics by design’. The Code proposes guiding principles centred on values
and ethical considerations that researchers must take into account from the design-stage
of their research and throughout its implementation. The Code has been translated into
nine languages and was launched globally at a meeting of the Leadership Council of the
Sustainable Development Solutions Network in Stockholm in May 2017 and presented to
the European Parliament in a dedicated event organised in June 2018.

The TRUST team supported as well the development of the first code of ethics by one of
the world’s oldest indigenous populations, the San of southern Africa who now have their
own rules for researchers intending to study their community and people: the SAN Code
for Research Ethics.

© iStock, 2020.

34
This Code has brought to an end more than a century of the San population being
measured, photographed, scrutinised and often exploited by researchers with no means
of having their rights recognized and little benefit to the people themselves.

After its launch, the San Code of Research Ethics received widespread media coverage. A
list of articles was published on the TRUST website. The following are amongst the most
renowned news sites that includes coverage on the San Code and TRUST project:
NATURE, Science, The Guardian, the Mail&Guardian, National Geographic, The Scientist,
Scientific American and The New Economy. Additionally a wide range of TRUST
materials was used by the Al-Jazeera English programme ‘The Stream’: ‘Is there an
ethical way to research indigenous communities?’
The project also produced A History of the San Code of Research Ethics, and two books
(both open access) edited by Springer: Ethics Dumping: Case Studies from North-South
Research Collaborations (downloaded 55,000 times in the first year) and Equitable
Research Partnership. The Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor
Settings was adopted by the European Commission as a reference document for
research funded projects under H2020 and by the European & Developing Countries
Clinical Trials (EDCT) Partnership.

With reference to research integrity, the work carried out through SwafS projects
contributed significantly not only in developing and promoting the research integrity
culture in Europe but also in establishing a European position in the world. The
PRINTEGER and DEFORM projects for instance sought to enhance research integrity by
promoting a research culture in which integrity is part of research itself, and not just an
external add-on or restrictive control system.

In 2017, the European Commission collaborated in the revision of the European Code of
Conduct for Research Integrity, a Code originally developed in 1990 by the European
Science Foundation (ESF) and All European Academies (ALLEA) to promote research
integrity. While research integrity is relatively new to Europe, the European Commission
and certain Member States such as the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries have
contributed significantly to granting Europe a leading position in the domain.

The Commission is holding discussions on research ethics and integrity with the Chinese
Ministry of Science and Technology with the aim to increase understanding and
cooperation in this area.

Furthermore, a dialogue is ongoing with supranational networks such as the American,

African and Asian Integrity networks. At the end of 2019, a new global partner with a
strong interest in ethics and integrity, South Korea, came on board. In 2020, the basis of
cooperation will be discussed and appropriate actions will be designed.

At the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity held in Amsterdam in 2017, all SwafS
RE/RI projects were represented and in the 2019 World Conference, held in Hong Kong,
the European Commission presented a dedicated session on RE/RI training involving
SwafS projects ENERI, Path2Integrity, INTEGRITY and VIRT2UE.

2.3.2. Capacity building and awareness raising

2.3.2.1. Training

RE/RI training courses and material have been designed primarily by the projects ENERI,
Path2Integrity, INTEGRITY and VIRT2UE. The projects mapped the training needs of
various target groups, such as: high school students, junior and senior researchers,
members of Research Integrity Offices (RIOs) and Research Ethics Committees (RECs),

35
ethics and research integrity experts and trainers. Tailored educational material is being
developed.

In the early years of Horizon 2020, the priority for training activities has been enhancing
the competences of research ethics committees and research integrity officers in
Member States and Associated Countries, and improving the knowledge of experts
involved in the evaluation of proposals (ethics review process). Subsequently, there was
a move towards developing innovative methods to those who teach RE/RI (train-the-
trainer modules) and to engage with all who are directly or indirectly involved in
research (training the researchers themselves). Efforts are currently ongoing in
developing innovative RE/RI training material for secondary school students,
undergraduate students, graduate students and young researchers in relevant fields.

ENERI set up the ENERI Classroom, a website where researchers, research integrity
officers and research ethics committee members and experts can find training material.

© Dirk Lanzerath, 2020.

VIRT2UE is developing an innovative training programme for trainers, with novel tools to
enable researchers to reflect on the principles outlined in the ECoC and apply these in
their daily work. Rather than focusing on compliance, the training is being designed to
stimulate researchers’ virtues.

© Embassy of Good Science, 2020.

36
All training material produced by the ENERI and VIRT2UE projects is being transferred to
the Embassy of Good Science platform (expected to be completed by 2021).

Path2Integrity is developing learning material on research integrity for students from

secondary school to young researchers based on learning paths using research integrity
role-models and role-play.

©Julia Prieß-Buchheit

A research integrity course for young researchers has also been developed by
PRINTEGER and is available online: Upright.

All the training material produced contributed to the promotion of a consistent

application of the principles listed in the European Code of Conduct for Research
Integrity (EcoC).

2.3.2.2. Tools

SwafS supported the development of a broad array of tools to build the capacity of the
research community to conduct ethically compliant research in Europe and worldwide
and guide researchers in terms of designing and carrying-out research respecting
research integrity standards.

PRINTEGER and DEFORM carried out an analysis of policies, procedures, codes,

guidelines and organisational structures addressing misconduct and promoting integrity
in science governance in universities and other research organisations and the results
are available on the PRINTEGER website.

37
Given the need for more concrete guidance, PRINTEGER developed a consensus
statement on how research performing organisations should work with research integrity
in practice. The focus was on operationalising institutional responsibilities in terms of
training, monitoring, etc. The project’s final conference held in Bonn in 2018 resulted in
the Bonn PRINTEGER Statement that was signed and adopted by a number of
universities.

Another set of operational recommendations for the investigation of research misconduct

is elaborated by ENRIO within the framework of the project ENERI: the Handbook on
Research Integrity.

Such recommendations are particularly relevant for countries struggling with setting up a
uniform and robust research integrity system, and can serve as a reference for countries
with established RI structures.

© Dirk Lanzerath, 2020.

38
An e-Manual on research ethics and research integrity was developed by ENERI, for
guiding researchers in the design phase of their research and for those evaluating
research. It’s a living document and seeks to instil discussion on research ethics (RE)
and research integrity (RI) related matters.

In terms of ethics compliance in research, ENERI developed the ENERI Decision Tree to
help researchers, REC and RIO members think about ethical questions and challenges
that might arise during a planned research project.

© Dirk Lanzerath, 2020.

As a complement to the Global Code of Conduct, TRUST developed tools aimed at

tackling ethics dumping: the Fair Research Contracts (FRC) toolkit and the forthcoming
Compliance and Ethics follow-up tool.

The Fair Research Contract (FRC) toolkit helps administrators, researchers and legal
advisors in low- and middle-income settings to achieve equitable research contracts in
collaboration with research teams from high-income settings offering freely accessible
up-to-date information, links and references to help users understand the factors
underpinning an equitable and transparent research partnership.

The Compliance and Ethics follow-up tool, complementary to the global code and the
FRC toolkit, will be a self-appraisal tool designed primarily for use by ethics committees
and funders as a means of monitoring researcher compliance with ethical requirements
over the course of a research study.

39
 © Cohred, 2020.

In response to the 2016 work programme topic, ‘Mapping the Ethics and Research
Integrity Normative Framework’, ENTIRE was funded with the aim of developing a wiki-
based online platform to make available the identified ethics/integrity normative
framework and material.

In 2019, at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity in Hong Kong, the platform
Embassy of Good Science was launched as a ‘one stop shop’ for all reference materials
and training modules. Currently, the platform provides access to the material produced
by ENTIRE and VIRT2UE. It will serve as a European Commission portal for all outputs of
the Framework Programme funded projects. Its ambition is to become the reference
platform of the RE/RI community, which will ensure it is kept up-to-date and sustainable
in the long term.

© Embassy of Good Science, 2020.

40
2.3.3. Development of frameworks and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)

With the SwafS work programme 2016-2017, the focus was put on ‘Ethical dimensions of
IT technologies’, ‘ethics of technologies with high socio-economic impact and human
rights relevance’ and on ‘promoting integrity in the use of research results in evidence-
based policy’.

In response to the work programme topic ‘The ethics of technologies with high socio-
economic impact and human rights relevance’, SIENNA is working on integrating the
ethical perspectives of emerging technologies, focusing on genomics, human
enhancement and human–machine interaction including the creation of intelligent
environments. For each of the three areas, operational guidelines for research ethics
committees and a code for responsible conduct for researchers will be produced.

The development of new technologies dramatically increased the capability for collection,
analysis and further processing of vast amounts of personal data. While such
developments have the potential of bringing enormous benefits in all spheres of social
life and science, they also created ethics tensions and challenged the application of
certain fundamental rights. This prompted a call for proposals under the topic ‘The
ethical dimensions of IT technologies: a European perspective focusing on security and
human rights’, under which the SHERPA project is funded.

SHERPA identified future scenarios on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and big data
analytics in various domains, to assess assumptions about the future social conditions
that might drive the use of AI and the ethical implications society may face as a result.
In addition, SHERPA is working on ten case studies seeking to provide the first large-
scale empirically-grounded analysis of what is actually happening across a number of
sectors in Europe, including government, health care, cybersecurity, telecommunications
and insurance.

SHERPA produced so far two guidelines:

 Guidelines for the Ethical Use of AI and Big Data Systems, to answer the question:
‘What is an ethical use of AI or a big data system?’

© iStock, 2020

41
 Guidelines for the Ethical Development of AI and Big Data Systems: An Ethics by
Design approach, intended to answer the question: ‘How can we construct an ethical
AI or big data system?’

© iStock, 2020

Under the same topic, PANELFIT aims to produce a set of outcomes that should serve as
practical guidelines and operational standards to reduce the ethical and legal issues
posed by ICT technologies, whilst ensuring high levels of privacy and
security/cybersecurity.

An additional topic in 2017, ‘Promoting integrity in the use of research results in

evidence based policy: a focus on non-medical research’ under which the project PRO-
RES is funded and is working on the definition of an Oviedo/Helsinki type framework for
non-medical research.

The topic ‘The ethics of informed consent in novel treatment including a gender
perspective’ aimed at helping clinicians find practical answers to ensure full compliance
with clinical ethics.

In this regard, I-Consent is working on guidelines to improve the information that

patients obtain from clinical studies on novel treatments. During the informed consent
process, patients learn about the study and decide whether or not to partake. At
present, many informed consent documents are complex, difficult to understand and
drafted without fully considering the patients’ perspectives.

I-Consent aims to improve the existing informed consent process through the
implementation of innovative proposals adapted to patients’ needs. This new perspective
seeks to empower patients in their decision as to whether to participate in clinical trials
and to increase their decision-making autonomy.

42
Concerning Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), the European Commission
emphasised the important role played by Research Performing Organisations (RPOs),
including Higher Education Institutions, and Research Funding Organisations (RFOs) in
shaping the culture of scientific research.

The first Council conclusions on Research Integrity, indicated the need to ’define and
implement policies to promote research integrity and to prevent and address research
misconduct’. The implementation of these policies requires the development of standard
operating procedures (SOPs) and guidelines related to research integrity and the
prevention of research misconduct’ 42

Under this framework, SOPs4RI aims to produce a toolbox for RPOs and RFOs including
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and guidelines.
2.3.4. Policy drive for ethics in technologies with high socio-economic impact

SIENNA, PANELFIT and SHERPA provided input in the public consultation of the EU High
Level Group on Artificial Intelligence ‘Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artificial
Intelligence’43 and continue to work further on operationalising these recommendations
in practical, operational guidelines for Framework Programme applicants.

2.4. Recommendations

2.4.1. Policy recommendations

Future calls and work programmes should support projects that continue to focus on
elevating Research Integrity to a level equal to that of Ethics (Art. 15 of the Proposal for
a Regulation establishing Horizon Europe), and making the European Code of Conduct
for Research Integrity a legal responsibility for all researchers.

Research Integrity is relatively recent in the EU and given the cultural differences
between Member States, further effort is needed to harmonise processes and procedures
regarding research misconduct and research integrity, as attested by members of the
Research Integrity Offices (conclusion of ENERI’s final review meeting).

The European Commission should continue facilitating collaboration among projects. The
RE/RI community, currently rather small and mostly involving Northern European
countries, should be further enlarged to facilitate a more active role of countries that are
typically less represented in the European research ethics and integrity domain. Efforts
should continue in strengthening the RI/RE community and facilitate the exchange of
best practices to ultimately allow common approaches and practices spread across
Europe.

Considering the differences across the EU, there is a need for continued efforts in RE/RI
education and training. Future calls and work programmes should continue working on
building the capacity of researchers and relevant actors to ensure that ethics and
research integrity guide all research and innovation activities.

In addition, dedicated training for National Contact Points for dissemination to applicants
is also needed.

42
SwafS Work Programme 2018-2020, SwafS-03-2018: Developing research integrity standard operating procedures
43
Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI

43
Collaboration with other relevant DGs should be further developed. For example:

 On-going dialogue with DG GROW (soon to be transferred to DG DEFIS) on

developing defence-specific guidelines related to ethics in the areas of robotics,
information systems security and human enhancement;
 Co-operation with DG JUST, the EDPS and DG SANCO (for health data) will continue
in the area of data protection and privacy;
 Co-operation with DG Home (security) and DG CNECT (ICT) will intensify due in
particular to the emergence of AI and its socio-economic impact;
 Co-operation with DG ENV will continue on the use of animals in research;
 Co-operation with DGs involved in the implementation of the Green Deal will be
established in the framework of the future work on Environmental Ethics.

Given the globalisation of research activities, the European Commission should further
encourage collaboration with international partners in SwafS-funded projects, with the
aim of defining accepted processes and mechanisms to allow harmonisation in the way
ethical and research integrity issues are tackled at a global level. Current examples of
collaboration includes countries such as China and South Korea as well as the American,
African and Asian research integrity networks.

2.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

In Horizon Europe the objective is to promote the ‘ethics by design’ principle in order to
stimulate reflection on ethical aspects while preparing the concept and methodology of
the research, and consequently embed ethical considerations in the research from the
outset. This would counteract the risk of ethics being considered as an ex-post add-on to
simply meet administrative requirements.

In Horizon Europe, the trust-based approach will be maintained and the ethics appraisal
scheme will focus on the severe and complex cases.

There is a need for General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) training and events for
researchers at national level, to raise awareness on GDPR requirements and national
derogations in order to embed these principles directly in the design of research
projects. Further cooperation between the national/institutional ethics committees and
the respective Data Protection Officers should be encouraged to ensure that the rights
and freedoms of research participants are adequately safeguarded.

Free online courses for researchers on research ethics and research integrity should
become more widespread. It may be worth considering synergies with topics under the
‘Science Careers’ theme focusing on ‘Research innovation needs & skills training in PhD
programmes’, where an additional module on ‘Research Ethics and Research Integrity’
could be envisaged.

Greater efforts are needed in the communication of project results to the general public
to allow citizens to have a clear view on the European Commission’s effort to strengthen
research integrity and research ethics in European funded research. TRUST is an
example of a project which excelled in its communication. The importance of
communication should be emphasised in the work programme topics.

Finally, another aspect that deserves attention is the development of a common entry
point, gateway/platform, for the existing RI/RE material developed by the various
projects. This will be extremely beneficial for the whole community and allow
researchers, trainers, experts, REC and RIO representatives to have a single access point
to the most recently developed tools, guidelines, ethics frameworks, regulations and

44
relevant RE/ RI material. This common entry point will encourage collaboration among
projects and facilitate access for newcomers to the community.

In parallel, this would serve as an incentive for projects to produce high quality reference
documents. Such a platform will ultimately ensure the sustainability of projects'
outcomes and strengthen considerably the impact of projects.

The Embassy of Good Science platform described in 2.3.2.2 will play that role and should
be fully embraced in Horizon Europe and beyond.

45
3. SCIENCE EDUCATION

Science Education forms the basis for the full achievement of the Innovation Union and
the European Research Area. Creative and innovative formal, non-formal and informal44
science teaching and learning help young people make the best use of their capacities to
become a force of innovation.

Encouraging formal, non-formal and informal science education is one of the dimensions
of Responsible Research and Innovation that cuts across Horizon 2020.
In this respect, institutional changes were promoted concerning the introduction of new
methods of teaching the curricula and new means of systematically fostering informal
learning in non-educational settings.
In addition, science education topics show a close link to the science communication
aspects of the programme, contributing to an informed and scientifically literate society.

3.1. Policy objectives

According to Annex I – Part V of the Specific Programme Council Decision of 3/12/2013,

the policy objective for Science Education in Horizon 2020 is to:

‘Encourage citizens to engage in science through formal and informal science education,
and promote the diffusion of science-based activities, namely in science centres and
through other appropriate channels.’

More specifically, the main goals of Science Education actions are:

 Greater participation of young people (up to age 20) in STEM;

 Encourage long-term careers in STEM;

 Equip citizens with the skills they need for active participation in science;

 Increase the number of countries participating at EUCYS;

 Increase the uptake of Scientix.

3.2. Project portfolio

Science Education was the focus of four particular domains (see Table 4) throughout
Horizon 2020’s work programmes, resulting in 19 funded projects (2019 and 2020 calls
not included) with a combined budget of EUR 37.445 million.

44
‘European Guidelines for Validating non-Formal and Informal Learning’
Formal learning: occurs in an organised and structured environment (e.g. in an education or training institution or on-the-job)
and is explicitly designated as learning (i.e. in terms of objectives, time or resources). Formal learning is intentional from the
learner’s point of view. It typically leads to validation and certification.
Non-formal learning: embedded in planned activities which are not always explicitly designated as learning (in terms of
learning objectives, learning time or learning support), but which do contain an important learning element. Non-formal
learning is intentional from the learner’s point of view. It can take place in museums, science camps, clubs, etc.
Informal learning: results from daily activities related to work, family or leisure. It is not organised or structured in ter ms of
objectives, time or learning support. Informal learning is mostly unintentional from the learner’s perspective.
45
The slight difference in the total figure calculated on basis of budget allocated to each project in table 4 is due to rounding.

46
 Fig. 8: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 9: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 10: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

A total of four third countries are involved: Australia, Belarus, Colombia and the United
States of America.

47
 Table 4: Science Education project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
SEAC-1-2014-2015 Innovative ways to make science education and scientific careers attractive to
young people (RIA, CSA)
01-08-2015 ITA-SUOMEN multico-
MultiCO 1.4 M FI EU: EE, DE, UK, CY
30-11-2018 YLIOPISTO project.eu
FUNDACIÓ PER
A LA perform-
01-11-2015 EU: ES(2), UK(3), FR(3),
PERFORM 2.0 M UNIVERSITAT ES research.e
31-10-2018 AT
OBERTA DE u
CATALUNYA
SciChallen 01-09-2015 EU: CZ, SE, CY, SI, HU, scichalleng
1.3 M SYNYO GmbH AT
ge 31-08-2017 AT, BE, UK e.eu/
EU: UK(3), EL(3), FI, DE,
CREATION 01-10-2015 UNIVERSITAET creations-
1.8 M DE MT, ES, SE, FR
S 30-11-2018 BAYREUTH project.eu
AC: CH, NO, RS
TECHNISCHE er4stem.e
01-10-2015 EU: BG, AT, EL, MT, UK,
ER4STEM 1.6 M UNIVERSITAET AT u/
30-09-2018 CZ
WIEN

01-09-2016 UNIVERSIDAD EU: DE(2), EL(2), FI, ES stimey.eu/

STIMEY 4.0 M ES
30-11-2019 DE CADIZ TC: BY home

INSTYTUT
EDU- 01-05-2016 GEOFIZYKI EU: PL, FR edu-
1.8 M PL
ARCTIC 31-07-2019 POLSKIEJ AC: IS, NO, FO arctic.eu
AKADEMII NAUK
STEM4you 01-05-2016 POLITECHNIKA EU: EL(2), SI(2), IT, CZ, stem4yout
1.8 M PL
th 31-10-2018 WARSZAWSKA ES(3) h.eu
INSTITOUTO
TECHNOLOGIAS
UMI-Sci- 01-06-2016 EU: IE, IT(2), FI, BE umi-sci-
1.8 M YPOLOGISTONK EL
Ed 31-05-2019 AC: NO ed.eu
AI EKDOSEON
DIOFANTOS
CHRISTIAN-
marine-
Marine 01-09-2016 ALBRECHTS- EU: BE, PL(2), DK, DE(3),
1.8 M DE mammals.
Mammals 31-08-2019 UNIVERSITAET SE
com
ZU KIEL
SEAC-2-2014 Responsible Research and Innovation in Higher Education Curricula (CSA)
livingknow
VRIJE
01-07-2015 EU: UK(2), IE(2), IT, ledge.org/
EnRRICH 1.5 M UNIVERSITEIT BE
31-03-2018 DE(2), HU, NL, ES, FR, LT projects/e
BRUSSEL
nrrich/
01-09-2015 UNIVERSIDAD EU: ES(3), DK, AT, HR, BE
HEIRRI 1.5 M ES heirri.eu
31-08-2018 POMPEU FABRA AC: NO
SwafS-15-2016, SwafS-01-2018-2019-2020 Open Schooling and collaboration on science
education (CSA)
EU: NL(2), ES, IE, DE, FI,
ELLINOGERMAN
EL(2), FR(2), IT, PT(2),
IKI AGOGI
01-04-2017 LU, BG, openschoo
OSOS 3.0 M SCHOLI EL
31-03-2020 AC: IL(2) ls.eu
PANAGEA
TC: AU, USA (special
SAVVA AE
agreement46)
01-09-2019 UNIVERSITETET EU: AT(2), SE(2), BE(2), seas.uio.n
SEAS 1.6 M NO
31-08-2022 I OSLO IT(2), EE, UK o
ETHNIKO KAI
pulchra-
KAPODISTRIAK
01-09-2019 EU: DE, PL, CZ(2), RO, IT, schools.eu
PULCHRA 1.5 M O EL
31-08-2022 LV, EL, SE, CY, IE /
PANEPISTIMIO
ATHINON
EU: IE, IT, AT, FR, CZ, PT, oshub.net
01-10-2019 UNIVERSITEIT
OSHub 1.5 M NL EL work/
30-09-2022 LEIDEN
AC: CH

46
European Commission website for the EU-US Cooperation in Research and Innovation

48
 KINDERBURO EU: AT(3), PL(2), NL(2), DK,
PHEREC 01-10-2019 phereclos.
1.5 M UNIVERSITAT AT FI, PT, IT, RO, UK
LOS 30-09-2022 eu
WIEN GMBH TC: CO
SwafS-11-2017 Science education outside the classroom (RIA)
TRINITY EU: NL, BE, FI, AT(2), SI, system202
SySTEM 01-05-2018
3.0 M COLLEGE IE IT, EL, DK 0.educatio
2020 30-04-2021
DUBLIN AC: IL, RS n
NORGES
EU: FI, EL, NL, SE, DE, MT,
CoM_n_ TEKNISK-
01-06-2018 ES, AT, UK (2) comnplays
Play- 3.1 M NATURVITENS NO
31-05-2021 TC: USA (special cience.eu
Science KAPELIGE
agreement)
UNIVERSITET

3.3. Achievements

The Science Education topics tend to attract the highest number of proposal submissions
in SwafS, showing a great interest and need for dedicated funding in this area. The high
number of applications led to a low success rate however ensured excellent projects
were selected for funding.
The European Commission flagged many Science Education projects as success stories in
relation to the quantity and quality of exploitable learning material, the engagement of
students and the project’s impact on teaching: PERFORM, SciChallenge, EDU-ARCTIC,
STEM4Youth and Marine Mammals.
ER4STEM was selected to participate in the Science is Wonderful exhibition at the
European R&I Days in Brussels in September 2019, and was a finalist at the European
Digital Skills Awards.
In addition to specific projects managed by the REA, the Science Education policy area in
Horizon 2020 included other actions. In particular, it is worth mentioning the EUCYS
contest and the Scientix portal.
The annual European Union Contest for Young Scientists (EUCYS) is one of Europe's
premier events for showcasing young scientific talent. It brings together winners of
national science competitions (young people between 14 and 20 years of age) to
compete with their European counterparts. The host country receives a grant to an
identified beneficiary for EUR 800,000. In 2019, Commissioner Mariya Gabriel attended
the Opening Ceremony and Deputy DG Signe Ratso attended the award ceremony in
Sofia. The contest in 2021 will be in Salamanca.
Scientix, the community for science education in Europe, was developed to ensure a
wide uptake and dissemination of STEM education practices. Scientix promotes and
supports a European-wide collaboration among STEM teachers, education researchers,
policy makers and other STEM education professionals.
This activity is funded by Horizon 2020 under SwafS ‘other actions’. This European
Commission initiative, since its inception in 2009, has been coordinated by European
Schoolnet. Scientix has been selected as one of the world’s top 100 innovations in
education.47

47
Article 'Scientix is one of the world’s top 100 innovations!', January 2017

49
3.3.1. Ready-to-use content for students

Projects produced a high number of quality, ready-to-use material for students. Even
after its official ending, the EDU Arctic project continues to provide the public with
online lessons given by Arctic researchers.

The Arctic Explorer Game App is an example of an innovative educational tool targeting
school pupils. It is based on the idea of 13-year-old EDU-ARCTIC Competition finalist
from the Faroe Islands (2nd edition) Yngva Sigursdottir Lamhauge. She had the idea of
creating a virtual journey through the Arctic, which, thanks to the form of a quiz, allows
participants to broaden their knowledge of this region. The idea was then further
developed by the project team and subsequently launched in the Google app store.

Finally, EDU Arctic developed Polarpedia, a free online encyclopaedia on polar research
and established an extensive knowledge base on the Arctic, with more than 500 terms
translated into 16 national European languages. ‘Polarpedia’ promotes the idea of co-
creation and contains photos, graphics and animations, videos as well as games and
quizzes.

STEM4youth produced freely available educational content for high school students
aimed at encouraging them to study STEM and to pursue STEM-careers (not only
academic). To this end, the project aimed at presenting students with tangible
arguments on why it is worthwhile studying STEM subjects and the career perspectives
in store for STEM graduates.

COM n PLAY Science developed the COMnPLAYer app to encourage children to discover
and learn about science, and have their say on what it means to them.

3.3.2. Toolkits for teachers

Educators are essential in delivering any knowledge and results coming from the projects
to students. Several projects included teacher training, and some produced deliverables
designed specifically for teachers.

ER4STEM, a project that explored robotics education, developed a generic curriculum

linking subject domains, technologies, use cases and powerful ideas. An educational
robotics repository was created for use and improvement by teachers, academics,
researchers and practitioners in the field of educational robotics.

Stem4youth researched citizen science at schools and provided a toolkit for teachers on
how to design and carry out such experiments.

SySTEM 2020 created a toolkit of design principles and methods to help educators and
pedagogical coordinators facilitate and reflect on the science learning activities offered in
non-formal learning environments. The toolkit also includes examples of best practices
and practical tips to support educators adapt the design principles to their particular
context.

In terms of capacity building, EnRRICH produced good practices and case studies that
demonstrate the embedding of RRI in modules and courses at 11 higher education
institutions. Similarly, the EnRRICH tool for educators in higher education provides
valuable insights in developing teaching modules and assisting in the design of teaching
and learning methods.

50
HEIRRI created formative training materials designed for different educational levels and
produced a booklet teaching and learning RRI presenting teaching resources in an
endeavour to teach RRI in universities and higher education institutions.

3.3.3. Open schooling

Schools are of course the nexus where Science Education mostly takes place. The OSOS
project promotes the open school model and supports adhering schools to hub together.

The OSOS Portal brings together 1000 schools from different European countries. These
schools have been introduced to the open schooling culture and are already involved in
numerous related activities promoting the use of open content and open pedagogies,
while establishing open cooperation schemes with local stakeholders, industries and
research organisations.

In order to continue promoting the open schooling approach, a new batch of projects
started at the end of 2019: SEAS, PULCHRA, OSHub and PHERECLOS.

3.3.4. Competitions

Competitions are a great way to engage and showcase the work of students and young
scientists. The aforementioned European Union Contest for Young Scientists (EUCYS) is a
prime example of a successful event of this type promoted by the European Commission
through SwafS. Individual projects also set up smaller-scale competitions.

Stem4Youth organised an open international student competition, along with a report

including conclusions and suggestions on how to organise similar events.

As mentioned above, EDU Arctic developed and maintains the Arctic competition for
teams of one or two pupils aged 13 to 20 and their teacher. In addition they created the
engaging EDU-Arctic App, to collect meteorological data and through which students can
collect points as part of the competition.

ER4STEM organised the annual European Conference on Educational Robotics (ECER)

which centred on the ‘botball’ competition. High-school students submitted papers and if
successful presented these at the conference and showcased their robotic developments.

3.3.5. Knowledge base

SySTEM 2020 started in 2018 and has already produced a mapping of over 1000
European STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics)
organisations, programmes, events, online projects and bottom-up initiatives across a
number of parameters. This has generated valuable insights and comparable data. The
collected data from these STEAM organisations contains vast information on different
targets groups, scientific topics, the methods used, outreach and communication
strategies, activities, collaboration, governance and more.

3.3.6. Dissemination

Most projects engaged with many students, teachers, the general public, schools, civil
society organisations and policy makers.
To give a sense of the amplitude of the outreach of the Science Education projects, we
have outlined the number of stakeholders reached from a few projects.
ER4STEM (a completed 3-year project) reported to have used a total of 571 robots to
engage with 4,459 students, well above the original target. An additional 510 people

51
were addressed in conferences, and more than 50 teachers were trained through
workshops. More than 80 teachers and Scientix ambassadors were present at the
repository webinars organised by the partners.

While initially aiming at reaching 10 EU countries, EDU-ARCTIC (also a completed 3-year

project) reached pupils in 60 countries across five continents and established a network
of over 1200 educators from over 800 schools. They estimate that the programme
reached at least 30,000 students, who participated in more than 500 online lessons
dedicated to the Arctic and polar research.

SySTEM 2020 (an on-going 3-year project) claim that their communication and
dissemination activities reached about 500,000 people in the following categories:

Table 5: SYSTEM 2020 dissemination

Category People reached by SySTEM 2020 dissemination

Scientific Community 2,137

Industry 759

Civil Society 5,428

General Public 195,922

Policy Makers 118

Media 1,937

Investors 25

Customers 2,240

Other 271,132

TOTAL 479,698

52
 EU success story example: Marine Mammals

The project is exemplar in utilising a specific topic like marine mammals to engage
citizens with science, technology and environmental awareness.

Significant exploitable results include novel educational resources relevant to school

curricula and attractive to students, teachers and the general public: 3D models,
“expedition boxes”, interactive digital posters, a book, practical activities and display
materials. These are available through the project website, project partner events and
exhibitions at consortium venues and other marine science centres.

© Marine Mammals, 2020.

These tangible outputs contribute considerably to ensuring a lasting legacy of the

project. They also make an excellent contribution to the current state-of-the-art in
marine science education and outreach.

Considerable impact has been achieved by directly involving over 400 teachers and
almost 1,500 students from 14 different countries in more than 50 events between
training sessions, summer schools and symposia. The public outreach activities have
reached an estimated 50,000 people in the partner countries.

© Marine Mammals, 2020.

Sustainability of the project has been ensured through the production of physical and
digital resources which project partners will continue to utilise in various ways in the
future.

The additional, unforeseen, opportunity to publish a book with a well-respected academic

publisher is an added positive.

53
 © Marine Mammals, 2020.

This project contributes towards EU policy and strategy in the areas of environment and
education. In particular it demonstrates the successful approach of using hands-on
learning inside and outside of the school curriculum and direct contact with scientists to
raise interest in and understanding of science careers and environmental issues.

54
3.4. Recommendations

3.4.1. Policy recommendations

In line with the von der Leyen Commission’s priorities, the Science Education community
recommends the systematic integration of climate change and energy issues into
schools' curricula.
More than 50 educational systems exist across the EU Member States, sharing common
challenges and offering many different solutions. This variety of experiences could be
better exploited with a view to identifying best practices for promoting Science
Education.

Science Education policy is closely connected with the first article 48 of the European Pillar
of Social Rights. The implementation of the life-long learning principle, involving people
outside of the formal education sphere, would benefit from better integration with citizen
science, citizen engagement and science communication policy areas.

A possible vehicle to this interconnection could be the extension of the open schooling
approach to open universities, whereby universities become community spaces, hosting
events and co-creation activities open to the public at large.

Other public spaces like museums or local municipalities could also be exploited. Science
communication professionals may use issues of particular public interest to help people
connect to science through everyday experiences. Such activities can help combat anti-
scientific attitudes.

Furthermore, a clear Science Education component could be integrated and supported in

each Citizen Science project.

Adults could also be more involved in their children’s educational activities and
promoting inter-generational learning. Accompanying carers should be kept in mind
when organising activities primarily targeting children.

3.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Horizon Europe should foresee standalone Science Education topics.

In terms of possible topics, one area of exploration could be calls dedicated to facilitating
interactions between secondary and tertiary education.

The full potential of the business world is yet to be explored and Science Education
topics could for example aim to identify mutual benefits and create the means for such
interactions.
Reinforced collaboration with Scientix would increase projects’ impact. This should be
added as a specific requirement in the work programme topic descriptions.

Furthermore, Scientix should assess the extensive material produced by Horizon 2020
Science Education projects and consider a ‘one-stop-shop’ solution for teaching
practitioners who do not have the time to look into individual projects.

48
‘Everyone has the right to quality and inclusive education, training and life-long learning in order to maintain and acquire
skills that enable them to participate fully in society and manage successfully transitions in the labour market.’

55
Scientix could ensure teaching material is readily identifiable and accessible. Scientix is
well placed to facilitate the exploitation of the material produced and ensure the
outcomes of projects are fully harvested.

The article on ‘additional dissemination obligations’, which applies for a number of SwafS
topics since 2018, should also be foreseen for Science Education projects in order to
share best practices, identify synergies and ensure sustainability.

It is advisable that project duration in relation to the budget foreseen is indicated in the
work programme topics. In terms of implementation, this would facilitate clustering
activities with the timing of periodic reviews for similar projects coinciding.

Aside from the standalone topics on Science Education, Horizon Europe could also
foresee mainstreaming of Science Education in other parts of the programme.
Coordination and support actions for science education, citizen science and science
communication could be aimed at facilitating these specific SwafS-related elements in
projects across the future framework programme.

Science Education policies should seek links beyond Horizon Europe, for example by
engaging with publicly recognised European scientific programmes like European Space
Agency (ESA)’s Copernicus.

Synergies should be explored between funding schemes with similar goals in Europe.
Notably, DG EAC has initiatives tying in directly with the goals of Science Education, for
example the European Key Competences Framework.

An example of successful synergies with other funding programmes is the Horizon 2020
project EDU Arctic, which secured additional European Economic Area (EEA) funding for
its Arctic exploration programme.

56
4. SCIENCE CAREERS

The European Research Area (ERA) priorities underline the importance of an open labour
market for researchers. This includes the removal of barriers to researchers’ mobility as
well as enhancing their training and career opportunities. As stated in the SwafS 2016
work programme, Europe will need around 1 million more researchers in the coming
years. Students and young researchers need to be better informed about European
opportunities for the pursuit of their career.49

One of the main challenges across the EU is to ensure transparent, open and merit-
based recruitment where this is still not the case. A lack of open recruitment not only
does injustice to individuals but also prevents universities from putting together the best
possible research teams.

Member States have signed up to removing any outstanding barriers to mobility and
stakeholder organisations are committed to filling their research positions according to
open recruitment procedures and to advertise all vacancies on EURAXESS. This will make
research careers more attractive and foster mobility and ultimately research quality.

The European Research Area (ERA) launched ‘EURAXESS – Researchers in Motion’

initiative to address barriers to researcher mobility. The initiative strives to become the
global support and career development tool for European and international researchers,
both in terms of their mobility within and beyond Europe as well as networking with
researchers from all over the world. Designed as a comprehensive tool-set, it provides
access to information and support services structured around the following five pillars:

 EURAXESS SERVICES is a network of more than 600 centres in 40 European

countries providing relocation assistance to ensure a smooth transition of Europe-
bound international or expatriate European researchers. This free service helps with
logistical matters including accommodation, visa and work permits, language
courses, schools for the researcher’s children, social security and medical care as well
as facilitating integration into the culture of the new host country. Today the centres
deal with about 450,000 mobility related issues per year.

 EURAXESS PORTAL is a recruitment tool for research personnel. The portal lists
research job vacancies, funding and hosting opportunities.

 EURAXESS NATIONAL PORTALS amounting to 40 national websites complement the

main EURAXESS Portal with country specific information on living and working
conditions for researchers.

 EURAXESS RIGHTS aims at better employment and working conditions for

researchers throughout Europe through the implementation of the ‘European Charter
for Researchers’ and the ‘Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers’.
Together both documents set out the rights and obligations of researchers, research
institutions and funding providers, with the aim of ensuring equitable treatment of all
researchers in Europe and increasing transparency in their selection and recruitment.
The ‘HR Excellence in Research’ is awarded to research institutions or funders
actively implementing the Charter & Code50. EURAXESS hosts the Human Resources
Strategy for Researchers (HRS4R) e-tool, the entry point for entities to apply for the
‘HR Excellence in Research’ award.

49
SwafS work programme 2016-2017, SwafS-20-2016
50
European Commission website for HRS4R

57
 EURAXESS WORLDWIDE is the international arm of the EURAXESS initiative with a
mandate to promote Europe as a research destination and bridge research
communities to facilitate scientific collaboration.

 EURAXESS Worldwide has dedicated teams in eight international hubs: ASEAN (focus
on Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam), Latin America and the
Caribbean (focus on Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Colombia), China, India,
Japan, Korea, North America (the US and Canada) and Australia/New Zealand.

 All EURAXESS pillars aim at achieving a truly open and excellence-driven ERA in
which highly skilled and qualified people can move seamlessly across borders, sectors
(e.g. academia and industry) and disciplines to where their talents can be best
employed, in order to advance the frontiers of knowledge and support innovation
throughout Europe and beyond.

4.1. Policy objectives

In the first SwafS work programme under Horizon 2020, the policy objective set in
relation to careers was to ‘ease access to scientific careers’ by increasing the services
offered by the EURAXESS Services Network51.

During the course of Horizon 2020, a number of topics in the SwafS work programmes
were dedicated to expanding the services offered by EURAXESS and raising awareness
among researchers about career opportunities beyond their country.

In parallel to enhancing EURAXESS services, the open nature of SwafS allowed for
flexible adaptation as needs arose including responding to the emerging challenge of
migration flows through the ‘Science4Refugees’ initiative (featuring in the 2017 and
2018 work programmes) aimed at welcoming refugee researchers in all career stages.
Projects funded aimed at integrating refugee researchers within the research labour
market of their host country.

Towards the end of Horizon 2020, a new area of focus emerged with the Open Science
Agenda coming to the fore. The Open Science Policy Platform (OSPP) adopted in April
2018 a set of prioritised actionable recommendations concerning eight Open Science
ambitions:

1. Rewards and Incentives

2. Research Indicators and Next-Generation Metrics
3. Future of Scholarly Communication
4. European Open Science Cloud
5. Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) Data
6. Research Integrity
7. Skills and Education
8. Citizen Science

With respect to researchers’ careers, the report produced by the Education and Skills
Working Group highlighted the need for researchers in Europe to have appropriate skills
and competences to practice Open Science and to ensure that Open Science skills
become an integral component of the standard education, training and career
development paths of researchers, and if possible even at earlier stages in their career in
schools and universities.

51
SwafS work programme 2014-2015

58
The skills necessary for Open Science include among others:

1. Open access publishing

2. Data management and open data
3. Enabling professional research conduct
4. Citizen science
Following on from this in 2019, a new topic emerged (SwafS-08-2019-2020) targeting
the improvement of researchers’ skills on Open Science and entrepreneurship (inter-
sectoral talent).

4.2. Project portfolio

Researchers careers was addressed in various themes throughout Horizon 2020 work
programmes, resulting in 20 funded projects (2020 call not included) and their combined
budget is approximately EUR 12.6 million52.

Fig. 11: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 12: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

52
The slight difference in the total figure calculated on basis of budget allocated to each project in table 6 is due to rounding

59
 Fig. 13: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

Table 6: Science Careers project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
SEAC-3-2014; SwafS-24-2017 Trans-national operation of the EURAXESS Service network (CSA)
EU: AT, BE, BG,
CY, CZ, DK, EE,
EL, ES, FR, HR,
EURAXES
01-09- IE, IT, LV,
S TOP III BAY ZOLTÁN
2015 MT(2), NL, PL, euraxess-
(Managed 3.6 M ALKALMAZOTT KUTATÁSI HU
31-08- PT, RO, SI, SK, top.eu/project/
by DG KÖZHASZNÚ
2018 UK
R&I)
AC: AL, BA, CH,
IL(2), IS, MD,
MK, NO, RS, TR
EU: AT, BE, BG,
CY, CZ, DK, EE,
ES, FR, HR, HU,
01-09-
CENTRE FOR RESEARCH IE, IT, LT, LV,
EURAXES 2018 euraxess-
3.3 M AND TECHNOLOGY EL NL, PL, PT, RO,
S TOP IV 31-08- top.eu/top-iv
HELLAS SE, SI, SK, UK
2021
AC: AL, BA, CH,
FO, IL, IS, MD,
MK, NO, RS, TR
SEAC-4-2015 EURAXESS outreach to industry (CSA)
vitae.ac.uk/research
01-05- er-careers/euraxess-
EU: AT, BG, ES,
EURAXIN 2016 CAREERS RESEARCH AND uk-career-
812 k UK HU, NL
D 30-04- ADVISORY CENTRE LTD development-
AC: IL
2018 centre/euraxind

60
SwafS-20-2016 ERA Mobility and Career Day (CSA)
ETHNIKO KENTRO euraxess.gr/gree
ERA-
01-03-2017 EREVNAS KAI ce/jobs-
MobilCa 80 k EL EU: EL(4)
28-02-2019 TECHNOLOGIKIS funding/about-
r.GR
ANAPTYXIS project
01-04-2017 STŘEDISKO SPOLEČNÝCH kariera.euraxess
MayDay 78 k CZ -
31-12-2017 ČINNOSTÍ AV ČR .cz

cordis.europa.eu
BG_Car 01-02-2017 SOFIISKI UNIVERSITET
78 k BG - /project/id/7411
eerDays 30-11-2017 SVETI KLIMENT OHRIDSKI
07

abg.asso.fr/en/a
MCD 01-04-2017 ASSOCIATION BERNARD rticle/researcher
88 k FR EU: DE, IT
2017 31-07-2018 GREGORY s-without-
borders-eu4phd
euraxess.es/spai
FUNDACIÓN ESPAÑOLA n/news/euscada
EUESCA 01-03-2017
90 k PARA LA CIENCIA Y LA ES EU: ES(6) -5-career-days-
DA 28-02-2018
TECNOLOGÍA researchers-
spain
euraxess.hu/hun
01-03-2017 NŐK A TUDOMÁNYBAN gary/events/era-
CARERA 81 k HU EU: HU(2)
28-02-2018 EGYESÜLET mobilitycareer-
day-ceu
МАКЕДОНСКА
ENCIRC 01-03-2017
80 k АКАДЕМИЈА НА НАУКИТЕ MK -
LE 31-10-2017
И УМЕТНОСТИТЕ
INSTYTUT
PL- cordis.europa.eu
03-04-2017 PODSTAWOWYCH
ERADay 85 k PL EU: PL(5) /project/id/7417
02-03-2018 PROBLEMÓW TECHNIKI
s 69
POLSKIEJ AKADEMII NAUK
SwafS-25-2016 Celebrating European Science (CSA)
01-07-2016 FUNDACIÓ INSTITUT DE EU: DK, ES, IT, enablenetwork.e
ENABLE 498 k ES
31-12-2020 RECERCA BIOMÈDICA NL u
SwafS-26-2017, SwafS-06-2018 Science4Refugees - Support to highly skilled refugee scientists (CSA)
uni-
bielefeld.de/Inte
01-04-2018 EU: BG, EL(3)
BRiDGE 370 k UNIVERSITÄT BIELEFELD DE rnational/project
31-03-2020 AC: CH, TR
s/bridge/bridge.
html
scirea.aegean.gr
01-03-2018 UNIVERSITY OF THE
SCIREA 113 k EL EU: IT /
29-02-2020 AEGEAN
aca-
ASSOCIATION POUR LA
01-04-2018 secretariat.be/in
GREET 202 k COOPÉRATION BE EU: DE, FI
30-09-2019 dex.php?id=110
ACADÉMIQUE
4
cordis.europa.eu
WESREF 01-05-2018
67 k ISTANBUL UNIVERSITESI TR - /project/id/7872
-IU 30-06-2019
48/
uni-
EU: AT, BG, bielefeld.de/Inte
BRiDGE 01-10-2018
607 k UNIVERSITÄT BIELEFELD DE EL(2), SE rnational/project
II 30-11-2020
AC: CH, RS s/bridge2/bridge
2.html
aca-
ASSOCIATION POUR LA
01-01-2019 secretariat.be/in
CARe 345 k COOPÉRATION BE EU: DE, FI
31-10-2020 dex.php?id=112
ACADÉMIQUE
3
SwafS-08-2019-2020 Research innovation needs & skills in PhD programmes (CSA)
EU: BE, CZ, FI,
FR(2), DE, EL, cordis.europa.eu
DocEnh 01-01-2020 UNIVERSITETET I LU, NL, PT, SK, /project/id/8724
991 k NO
ance 31-12-2022 TROMSØ ES(2), SE 83
AC: CH(2), NO
TC: GH
cordis.europa.eu
CHAMEL 01-03-2020 UNIVERSITY COLLEGE EU: IE(3), EL,
998 k IE /project/id/8731
EONS 28-02-2022 DUBLIN ES(2), FI, PT(2)
05

61
4.3. Achievements

4.3.1. EURAXESS services

The SEAC.3.201453 and SwafS-24-2017 topics on ‘Trans-national operation of the

EURAXESS Service network’ focused on further intensifying the services provided by the
EURAXESS Service Centres. Such services include setting-up of career development
and/or support for dual careers centres over a wider geographical range of the network,
support to researchers and young entrepreneurs for start-ups, better integration of
researchers into the culture of the host country and/or business environment as well as
mentoring programmes for researchers.

In 2018, the EURAXESS Portal was improved with a new section including Career
Development resources for researchers and institutions supporting research. All
resources intended for use by researchers directly are accessible free of charge via the
main EURAXESS website without requiring membership.

The No Limits Career Orientation Tool is designed to help researchers identify what is
important for their career development, locate further information and plan accordingly.
The PIPERS Project Career Kit is a collection of external learning resources on the topics
of entrepreneurial skills, information literacy, disciplinary working, IPR, leadership skills,
managing a research career, professional development, public engagement, researcher
self-assessment, market exploitation of research results and working with industry.
The Intercultural Assistant Tool is designed to help researchers adapt and integrate in a
new cultural environment. With this tool, researchers can test and develop their
intercultural competence and learn how to become part of a new community, while
reaching their research goals and making the best out of their new job.

The Talent Development Suite (TDS) is a tool created within the EURAXESS TOP III
project which primarily aims to assist postdocs one to three years after completing their
PhD, during the period in which researchers typically tend to opt either for an academic
or follow an alternative career path. The TDS is structured into four different assessment
sections concluding with the ‘Personal Journey Map’.

The ongoing training schemes of EURAXESS TOP IV build upon what has been developed
under EURAXESS Top III.

The EURAXIND project funded under SEAC.4.2015 on EURAXESS outreach to industry

aimed at equipping EURAXESS Service Centres with tools to increase the uptake/use of
the EURAXESS portals and services by industry. Furthermore, EURAXESS is expanding
its activities beyond internationally mobile researchers to also support inter-sectoral
movement amongst researchers. The project conducted surveys 54 to shed light on
researchers’ experiences and expectations of inter-sectoral mobility.

In 2016, the ‘ERA Mobility and Career Days’ topic was introduced with a particular focus
on countries where jobs and funding for researchers is scarce and hence European
opportunities would be of particular interest.

A portfolio of eight projects were funded resulting in a range of on-campus events on the
careers of young researchers involving employers and researchers in Greece, Czech
Republic, Bulgaria, France, Spain, Hungary, North Macedonia and Poland. All projects

53
This topic and the resulting project was managed by DG R&I.
54
CORDIS article on EURAXIND survey

62
organised events with an attractive programme for researchers with respect to their
career development and mobility. The number of events varied across projects ranging
from two to five events per project. Attendance levels were high indicating that the
expected results have been achieved with respect to raising awareness levels on
European job and funding opportunities.

In 2016, an additional topic was introduced in the work programme on ‘Celebrating

European Science’ resulting in the funding of ENABLE which seeks to promote excellence
in the biomedical sciences in Europe. The project’s flagship initiative is the career day
during which PhD students and postdocs from all over Europe are given the opportunity
to interact with professionals from different fields, to discuss career perspectives beyond
the laboratory workbench55. These annual 3-day international congresses on
biomedicine56, organised by and for young biomedical scientists, seek to: support young
researchers, strengthen scientific careers, and bring biomedicine closer to society. The
career day is organised within the yearly symposium, and is the most successful part of
the event. It is intended for this career day to be integrated in other large conferences
once the project concludes.

4.3.2. Science4Refugees

The Science4Refugees initiative focused on refugee researchers or scientists granted

asylum in a host country, to enable them to continue their educational path or enter the
labour market. The action targeted existing initiatives that already supported the
integration of refugees into their new employment setting and culture, to prepare for the
highly competitive job market. The action sought to scale-up initiatives to the European
level and make use of the EURAXESS portal to increase their visibility.

A portfolio of six projects were funded under this initiative. Activities were funded in
countries which typically have high numbers of asylum seekers. Many of the projects
faced challenges to carry out the planned activities, for example bureaucracy preventing
access to refugees, poor living conditions, refugees preoccupation with resolving basic
needs before tackling their career aspirations, reluctance to share personal data and in
some cases even uprisings and riots.

Despite these challenges, projects organised the planned seminars and events to put
highly skilled refugees in contact with potential employers. However, the take-up of
initiatives varied across projects and countries with participation levels in many proving
disappointing (see section 4.4.1).

The GREET project targeted national support structures and higher education institutions
rather than refugees directly in nine European countries. GREET's main outcomes are the
Peer Learning Activity to facilitate the exchange of best practices, foster mutual learning
and to serve as a discussion platform for stakeholders as well as on-going work on an
online repository.

The CARe project aims to produce ten country information guides on the R&D landscape
and employer groups which will be made available on the EURAXESS portal.

4.3.3. Skills in PhD programmes

DocEnhance, which commenced in January 2020, aims to enhance and integrate

transferable skills into existing PhD programmes and produce a curriculum and course
material.

55
ENABLE: Scientific Symposium
56
Events in Barcelona (2017), Copenhagen (2018), Netherlands (2019), Milan (2020).

63
CHAMELEONS, which started in March 2020, seeks to develop a range of
interdisciplinary, inter-sectoral and international modules, designed to broaden the skills
of PhD graduates and improve their employability in academic and non-academic
environments.

4.3.4. Dissemination

The type and number of stakeholders the projects engaged with depended of course on
their scale.
With respect to EURAXESS online services, in 2019, more than 80,000 job adverts were
published compared to 7,500 in 2010. In 2019, 3.9 million people from 233 countries
visited the EURAXESS portal. With 1.6 million page views per month, EURAXESS is one
of the most popular websites of the European Commission. More than 100,000 users
created EURAXESS accounts out of which 54,200 are registered researchers. 16,500
institutions are registered and can publish vacancies. The funding database displays over
300 offers per year and the hosting section lists up to 750 job advertisements. Efforts
made at the national level have also contributed, for example in Poland legislation was
adopted making it mandatory for publicly funded organisations to publish on EURAXESS
Jobs.

With respect to the ‘ERA Mobility and Career Days’ action, taking the BG_Careers Day as
an example, more than 600 young researchers and master students attended the events
and 45 industrial organisations and HR agencies, including the Representation of the
European Commission in Bulgaria participated with information stands. By the time the
project ended, the Bulgarian EURAXESS Portal hits increased by 36% and 82 new open
job positions were registered.

4.4. Recommendations
4.4.1. Policy recommendations

In terms of researchers’ careers, in its report on career development services and

centres in the EURAXESS network, the EURAXESS Top III project recommended further
developing tools for researchers to evaluate and plan their professional development
including mobility opportunities; better promotion of new services available for
researchers; organisation of initiatives creating opportunities for researchers to link up
with industry and greater clarity on the type of skills industry requires of researchers.

EURAXESS offers services for the professional career perspective of researchers’ spouses
(dual career centres). Regarding dual careers, future developments should encourage
institutions to be fully transparent with a publicly accessible dual careers policy. Equally
important is the development of communication strategies and identification of an official
contact person for dual career matters.

For projects carrying out similar activities for example, for the national ‘Career Days’,
there is an opportunity to ensure synergies by envisaging larger projects with multi-
country consortia whereby partners would organise Careers Days in their respective
countries.

For the ‘Science4Refugees’ initiative, greater emphasis on communication to ensure

maximum outreach for activities organised for this vulnerable target group. More
insights into the profile of refugee researchers (gender, degree level, field and origin
country, but also on position prior to fleeing, and splitting the data by destination
country) would help tailor the offering to support them in their career development.
Furthermore, a robust risk plan with well-developed mitigation measures should be
foreseen. Finally, for the ‘Science4Refugees’ type of action, the action should target

64
national support structures rather than refugees directly (similar to target of GREET cited
in 4.3.2).

While the Report of the Working Group on Education and Skills under Open Science,
identified the Open Science skills set, it is not sufficiently evident that Citizen Science is
part of Open Science. Greater awareness raising initiatives are needed to promote this
aspect of Open Science.

4.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Researchers’ engagement in Open Science will increase through encouragement and

incentives from funders through assessment.57 If Open Science skills are to be fully
embraced, then the respective activities, notably citizen science, should be explicitly
mentioned and assessed under the evaluation criterion of Excellence ‘Appropriate
consideration of interdisciplinary & intersectoral approaches and, where relevant, citizen
science activities and the gender dimension’.

A report produced by the OSPP Incentives and Rewards Working Group focused on the
rewards and incentives for researchers and the ways in which researchers at all career
stages should be rewarded, distinguishing between academic and non-academic settings
and could be a subject to address in a future work programme topic.

57
Report on ‘Evaluation of research careers fully acknowledging Open Science practices’

65
5. GENDER EQUALITY

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research are a priority for Member
States and Associated Countries of the European Research Area (ERA), since the
Communication on the ERA of 7 July 2012. Horizon 2020 made significant progress
in promoting gender equality in the European Research & Innovation policy
(Regulation Establishing Horizon 2020) in terms of strengthening its legal basis, by
enshrining gender equality as a general principle of the programme in Article 16,
singling it out as one of the components of Responsible Research and Innovation in
Art. 14(l) on cross-cutting issues, and featuring it as part of SwafS in Annex I - Part
V, Art. 3(b). Furthermore, gender equality is also mentioned as a cross-cutting
priority in Art. 2.c of Annex I to Horizon 2020’s Specific Programme. Consequently,
gender equality has been a strategic orientation and a line of activity in each Horizon
2020 work programme.

The ERA Communication was followed by the Council conclusions of 1 December

2015 on advancing gender equality in the European Research Area, acknowledging
the contribution of gender equality to the quality of research and innovation. The
need for sustainable cultural and institutional change along the three following
objectives was reaffirmed:

 Removing barriers to the recruitment, retention and career progression of women

researchers;
 Addressing gender imbalances in decision making processes;
 Integrating the gender dimension in research and innovation content.

In the proposal on establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon

Europe, the ‘Reforming and Enhancing the European R&I System’ part of the
‘Widening Participation and Strengthening the ERA’ horizontal pillar includes:
‘Supporting and monitoring gender equality as well as other forms of diversity in
scientific careers and in decision making, including in advisory bodies, as well as the
integration of the gender dimension in research and innovation’. Furthermore, Article
2 includes ‘strengthening the gender dimension across the Programme’ as an
operational objective and Article 4.3d foresees ‘gender equality, including the
integration of gender dimension in the R&I content’ forming part of the multi-annual
strategic plan.

5.1. Policy objectives

The gender equality (GE) policy objectives for the SwafS work programme are the
three GE objectives established for the ERA and transposed into Horizon 2020:

 Gender equality in careers at all levels;

 Gender equality in decision-making;
 Integration of the gender dimension into R&I content

To achieve these goals, a systemic approach was developed to tackle gender

inequalities, through institutional change. The approach chosen, already initiated
under FP7 was to support the implementation of Gender Equality Plans (GEPs) in
research performing organisations (RPOs), including universities and research
funding organisations (RFOs).

66
GEPs should be developed using a coherent approach based on the minimum
requirements listed in the ERA Communication of 2012:

 Conduct assessment/audit of procedures and practices with relevant data to

identify gender bias within the organisation;
 Implement effective actions to be developed over time, according to the identified
bias;
 Set targets and monitor progress via indicators within the organisation.

In 2015-2016, DG R&I and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)
developed the Gender Equality in Academia and Research tool – the GEAR tool – as a
step-by-step guide to assist institutions in developing GEPs. In the 2018-2020 work
programme, reference to the GEAR tool became a requirement for all GEP projects.

Topics supporting the implementation of GEPs were present in all Horizon 2020 work
programmes. In the last call in 2020, special attention is given to GEP-implementing
organisations from countries for which the implementation of ERA Priority 4 (‘Gender
equality and gender mainstreaming in research’) has shown slower progress (as
shown in the ERA Progress Report 2018), i.e. mainly widening countries58. Particular
emphasis is also placed on the sustainability of the GEPs to be implemented and on
the impact at national level, with a recommendation to involve national authorities.

Further to the development and implementation of GEPs, several topics throughout

the Horizon 2020 work programmes were devoted to expanding the knowledge base
on the impact of initiatives regarding gender equality in research. To this end, a
comprehensive strategy was designed and updated over the course of Horizon 2020
in order to support institutional changes and address gender inequalities at all levels.

Actions included establishing a network of national representatives and resource

centres on gender, creating a community of practitioners, investigating potential
gender biases in the allocation of grants, monitoring of initiatives, developing
training and capacity building on gender equality in R&I, and more recently,
addressing international cooperation.

More specifically, actions were foreseen to investigate and promote the impact of
gender diversity in Research and Innovation (GERI-2-2014), evaluate initiatives to
promote gender equality in research policy and research organisations (GERI-3-
2014) as well as looking at gender gaps and biases in the allocation of grants
(SwafS-10-2018).

Coordination of national-level stakeholders on gender in R&I was addressed by the

topics SwafS-02-2016 and SwafS-19-2016. Topics were dedicated to strengthening
the European community of practice of GEP-implementers, disseminating gender
knowledge as well as promoting science careers for girls.

More recently, a topic was dedicated to research scenarios for an award/certification

system for gender equality in research organisations and universities in Europe
(SwafS-11-2019).

In the spirit of Horizon 2020’s open to the world approach embraced by SwafS, in
2019 a topic was dedicated to studying the gender perspective of science,
technology and innovation (STI) in dialogue with third countries.

58
European Commission website for 'Spreading Excellence and Widening Participation'

67
In the 2020 call, two new complementary topics address key issues notably gender-
based violence and sexual harassment in research organisations and bridging the
gender gap in innovation by reaching out to the next generation of innovators.

Other actions coordinated by DG R&I, were also implemented under the SwafS work
programme, including:

 Monitoring the state of gender equality in research and innovation (She Figures);
 Supporting the Finnish Presidency of the EU in organising a conference around the
new challenges and opportunities for gender equality in R&I59;
 Establishing an Expert Group to update and expand ‘Gendered Innovations/
Innovation through Gender’ and help support the strengthened integration of the
gender dimension in R&I content across Horizon Europe;
 Running the annual editions of the EU Prize for Women Innovators.

5.2. Project portfolio

SwafS in Horizon 2020 funded a total of 28 projects (2020 call excluded) under the
Gender Equality theme, with a budget of EUR 64.660 million.

Fig. 14: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

59
EU2019.FI ‘Research and Innovation Excellence through gender equality: New pathways and challenges’
60
The slight difference in the total figure calculated on basis of budget allocated to each project in tables 7 and 8 is due
to rounding

68
 Fig. 15: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 16: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

Table 7: Gender Equality Plan (GEP) project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
GERI-4-2014-2015; SwafS-3-2016-2017; SwafS-9-2018-2019-2020 Support to research
organisations to implement gender equality plans (CSA)
Completed
EU: NL, UK, IT(2),
STIFTUNG DEUTSCHES genera-
01-09-2015 DE(2), AT, ES, RO,
GENERA 3.2 M ELEKTRONEN- DE project.co
31-08-2018 PL, FR, NL
SYNCHROTRON m
AC: CH
EU: IT(2), AT, FR,
01-10-2015 FUNDACIÓ CENTRE DE
LIBRA 2.3 M ES UK, DK, DE, CZ, NL eu-libra.eu
31-03-2018 REGULACIÓ GENÓMICA
AC: CH
ALMA MATER
EU: UK, SI, PT,
01-02-2016 STUDIORUM –
PLOTINA 2.3 M IT ES(3), AT, BE, IT plotina.eu
31-01-2020 UNIVERSITÀ DI
AC: TR
BOLOGNA
HELMHOLTZ ZENTRUM
Baltic 01-09-2016 FÜR EU: EE, DE(3), LT, baltic-
2.2 M DE
Gender 31-08-2020 OZEANFORSCHUNG SE, FI gender.eu
KIEL
sage-
01-09-2016 TRINITY COLLEGE EU: IT, PT, FR, UK
SAGE 2.3 M IE growingequ
31-08-2019 DUBLIN AC: TR, BA
ality.eu

69
 EU: IT(2), DE, FI,
01-06-2016 equal-
EQUAL-IST 1.9 M VILABS OE EL LT, PT
31-05-2019 ist.eu
AC: UA TC: LI
Running
EU: RO, IT(2), EL,
01-05-2017 INSTITUT FÜR HÖHERE gendertarg
TARGET 2.0 M AT FR, ES, CY
30-04-2021 STUDIEN et.eu
AC: RS TC: MA
01-05-2017 TECHNISCHE EU: IT, PL, ES, CZ, geecco-
GEECCO 2.0 M AT
30-04-2021 UNIVERSITÄT WIEN AT(2), BE, DE project.eu
EU: CY, IT(2), ES,
01-05-2018 UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI
R-I PEERS 2.0 M IT BE, SI, EL ripeers.eu
30-04-2022 STUDI DI SALERNO
AC: IL, TN
INTERDISZIPLINARES
EU: DE(2), PT, SK,
01-05-2018 FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM change-
CHANGE 2.0 M AT SI
30-04-2022 FÜR TECHNIK, ARBEIT h2020.eu
AC: IL
UND KULTUR
UNIVERSIDAD
01-06-2018 EU: BE, FR, IT(2), superaproj
SUPERA 2.0 M COMPLUTENSE DE ES
31-05-2022 HU, PT, ES ect.eu
MADRID
UNIVERSIDAD DE LA EU: PT, SI, UK(2),
GEARING 01-01-2019 gearingrole
3.0 M IGLESIA DE DEUSTO ES EE, BE, ES, NL
ROLES 31-12-2022 s.eu
ENTIDAD RELIGIOSA AC: TR
CENTRE DE COOP.
INTERN. EN
Gender- 01-01-2019 EU: ES, IT, IE, NL, gendersma
2.9 M RECHERCHE FR
SMART 31-12-2022 CY, BE, CZ, FR rt.eu
AGRONOMIQUE POUR
LE DEVELOPPEMENT
EU: SE, DE, HU,
01-01-2019 SYDDANSK gender-
SPEAR 3.0 M DK AT, BG(2), LT(2),
31-12-2022 UNIVERSITET spear.eu
PT, HR
Starting
EU: IT(2), EL, HR, caliper-
01-01-2020
CALIPER 2.9 M VILABS OE EL SK, BE, ES, RO,DE project.eu/
31-12-2023
AC: TR, GE
cordis.euro
EQUAL4EU 01-01-2020 EU: NL(2), SK, SI, pa.eu/proj
3.0 M FUNDACION ESADE ES
ROPE 31-12-2023 DE, FR, BE ect/id/8724
99
cordis.euro
UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI EU: DE(2), IT, ES,
01-01-2020 pa.eu/proj
LeTSGEPs 2.4 M STUDI DI MODENA E IT FR
31-12-2023 ect/id/8730
REGGIO EMILIA AC: AL, RS
72
cordis.euro
ATHENS UNIVERSITY
pa.eu/proj
TARGETED- 01-09-2020 OF ECONOMICS AND EU: BE, SE, UK(2)
2.5 M EL ect/id/8722
MPI 31-08-2024 BUSINESS – RESEARCH TC: LB
60
CENTRE

Table 8: Other Gender Equality project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
GERI-1-2014 Innovative approach to communication encouraging girls to study science (CSA)
STICHTING NATIONAAL
EU: BE, DK(2),
01-08-2015 CENTRUM VOOR expecteverything
Hypatia 1.5 M NL FR(2), IT, NL (2)
31-07-2018 WETENSCHAP EN .eu/hypatia
AC: IL
TECHNOLOGIE
GERI-2-2014 Impact of gender diversity on Research & Innovation (RIA)
FUNDACIÓ PER A LA
01-10-2015 EU: DE(2), SE,
GEDII 1.0 M UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE ES gedii.eu
30-09-2018 UK(2)
CATALUNYA
GERI-3-2015 Evaluation of initiatives to promote gender equality in research policy and research
organisations (RIA)
FRAUNHOFER
GESELLSCHAFT ZUR
01-06-2016 EU: ES, AT, DK,
EFFORTI 2.0 M FOERDERUNG DER DE efforti.eu
31-05-2019 HU, LU
ANGEWANDTEN
FORSCHUNG
SwafS-19-2016 Networking of National representatives and resource centres on Gender in R&I (CSA)
EU: AT(2), CY,
INSTITUTE OF
DE, EL(2), ES,
GENDERA 01-04-2017 SOCIOLOGY OF THE
2.0 M CZ LU, MT(3), SI, genderaction.eu
CTION 31-03-2021 ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
SK
OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC
AC: TR, BA
SwafS-02-2016 Promoting Gender Equality in Horizon 2020 and the ERA (ERA-NET Cofund)

70
 GENDER EU: AT, BE, CZ,
NET Plus CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA CY, EE, ES(2),
15-09-2017 gender-net-
(Managed 3.8 M RECHERCHE FR FR, IE, IT, SE
14-09-2022 plus.eu
by DG SCIENTIFIQUE AC: IL, NO
R&I) TC: CA(2)
SwafS-08-2017 European Community of Practice to support institutional change (CSA)
EU: UK(3),
FUNDACIÓ PER A LA ES(2), AT, IE,
01-05-2018
ACT 3.0 M UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE ES DE(3), FR, PL, act-on-gender.eu
30-04-2021
CATALUNYA SI, SE
AC: IS TC: CR
SwafS-10-2018 Analysing gender gaps and biases in the allocation of grants (RIA)
JOANNEUM RESEARCH
01-01-2019 EU: SE, ES, DE, granted-
GRANTeD 2.0 M FORSCHUNGS- AT
28-02-2023 NL project.eu
GESELLSCHAFT MBH
SwafS-13-2018 Gender Equality Academy and dissemination of gender knowledge across Europe (CSA)
EU: BE, IT(2),
GE 01-01-2019 CZ, DE, ES, AT,
2.0 M VILABS OE EL ge-academy.eu
Academy 31-12-2021 IE, FR, HU
AC: NO
SwafS-11-2019 Scenarios for an award/certification system for gender equality in research organisations
and universities in Europe (RIA)
cordis.europa.eu
01-01-2020 FONDATION EUROPÉENNE EU: IT(2), UK,
CASPER 1.5 M FR /project/id/8721
31-12-2021 DE LA SCIENCE BE, ES, CZ, AT
13
SwafS-12-2019 The gender perspective of science, technology and innovation (STI) in dialogue with third
countries (RIA)
GENDER EU: AT, ES, FI,
STI To be FR, IT, PT
(Grant 2.0 M confirmed INMARK EUROPA SA ES TC: AR, CA(2),
Agreement
Preparation
CL, BR, CN, IN,
on-going) KR, MX, US, ZA

5.3. Achievements

5.3.1. Gender Equality Plans

In Horizon 2020, excluding the 2020 call, 18 GEP projects have been funded (listed
in

Table 7: Gender Equality Plan (GEP) project portfolio),

with a total budget of EUR 43.9 million61
(corresponding to 68% of the total budget allocated to gender equality projects in
SwafS).

Out of all 168 institutions involved in GEP projects, 130 institutions (78%) are
implementing GEPs, while other partners have either an independent evaluating role
(a requirement for the GEP call topics) or a consultancy or technical role.

Of the total EUR 43.9 million budget allocated to GEP projects, EUR 34.2 million
(78%) is ear-marked for GEP-implementing institutions.

61
Calculated on the basis of actual budget of GEP projects (table 7 displays rounded figures)

71
 Fig. 17: Number of GEP-implementers in Member States (MS), Associated Countries (AC) and Third Countries (TC)

Only the six completed GEPs projects are presented below: GENERA, LIBRA,
PLOTINA, Baltic Gender, SAGE, and EQUAL-IST (see

Table 7: Gender Equality Plan (GEP) project portfolio).

GEP projects have been instrumental in embracing new challenges such as the need
to address sexual harassment and gender-based violence in academia, and to
develop an inclusive approach.

Furthermore, GEP projects have been models and catalysers for action at the
national level in many countries and are prime examples of institutional changes that
live well beyond the life of the project.

As an example, the SAGE Charter of Principles for Gender Equality, designed to

promote stronger action on gender equality and research, supports structural,
cultural and political change to eradicate sexism, bias and other forms of
discrimination in research and higher education, was formally endorsed by the Irish
Universities Association at the launch event in May 2019 with the intention for higher
education institutions across Europe to sign up to this Charter.62

A comprehensive 3-phase approach to GEPs and institutional changes was developed

by SAGE based on the GEAR tool, and summarised in the SAGE Wheel Model for
Gender Equality Plans:

 Institutional Self-Assessment;
 Construction and implementation of GEPs;
 Embedding Gender Knowledge in Organisations

The SAGE Wheel Toolkit aims to assist organisations to effect and sustain change in
cycles. At each cycle, the organisation should re-assess itself and carry out the

62
Trinity College Dublin 'Minister Mitchell O’Connor launches gender equality charter', 15 May 2019

72
necessary changes towards ensuring gender equality. SAGE has been flagged by the
European Commission as a Horizon 2020 success story.

GENERA produced several working papers and guidelines on the implementation of

GEPs in physics research organisations. The most innovative output is the Toolbox
for tailored Gender Equality plans (by and for physicists), a structured collection of

72
good practices to address gender inequality (measures, instruments and activities)
related to structural, social, cultural, and political aspects of work environments in
various (mainly physics related) research performing and funding organisations
(RPFOs), as well as higher education institutions (HEIs). GENERA also addressed the
need, reported by many GEP projects, to tailor GEPs to each specific institution with
its Roadmap for the implementation of customised GEPs.

LIBRA focused more particularly on increasing the presence and representation of

women in leadership positions in life sciences. Among the projects deliverables, the
LIBRA Recruitment Handbook stands out as an invaluable resource providing
research institutions with tangible instruments to carry out a more inclusive,
transparent and unbiased recruitment process. LIBRA, flagged by the Commission as
a success story, also produced a video to point out the main biases that may occur
during a recruitment process and convey how an equality-committed panel could
address these biases. This video was adopted by the European Research Council
(ERC)’s Working Group on Gender Issues and is also recommended as part of the
Horizon 2020 briefing for evaluators.

PLOTINA produced a curated repository listing potential actions RPOs can consider to
enhance gender equality, analyses of case studies as well as a glossary of gender
equality-related terms. PLOTINA’s main achievements are its toolkits: step-by-step
guides on how to carry out a Gender Audit, how to design a GEP, how to implement
it, how to monitor the GEP’s progress and ensure its upkeep. The project was also
flagged by the Commission as a success story with remarkable dissemination
outputs including a video to provide guidance on how to counteract unconscious
gender biases in the evaluation and recruitment of professors and researchers.

The Baltic Gender consortium, formed by research institutes in the field of marine
science, analysed its members’ performance in terms of gender equality. Apart from
the good practices listed by other GEP projects, a distinctive outcome of Baltic
Gender is the ‘Handbook of gender-sensitive indicators’, aimed at measuring gender
equality.

One of the unique contributions of EQUAL-IST to GEPs has been its Idea
Crowdsourcing Platform to facilitate the co-design of tailored GEPs (EQUAL-IST
partners were mostly research institutions in the field of information and computer
technologies). The EQUAL-IST Toolkit, targets research organisations with a focus on
ICT (Information and Communication Technology) and IST (Information System
Technology) with an interest in setting up actions aimed at improving and achieving
gender balance in a research field where women are still a minority, and where
scientific and applied research remain male-oriented. All the GEPs implemented by
EQUAL-IST partners are published on the project’s website. EQUAL-IST has been
flagged by the Commission as a Horizon 2020 success story.

5.3.2. Networking and community building

An additional policy objective for SwafS in Horizon 2020 was to build a network of
Communities of Practice (CoPs), acting as agents to develop gender equality plans in
research organisations in the ERA.

This community-building role was the task of the ACT project which is working to:

 Establish the first European network of Communities of Practice by supporting

eight thematic or geographical CoPs working on gender equality in higher
education and research and innovation, assess their needs, and offer
opportunities to foster synergies and innovation in this field.

73
 Consolidate and strengthen existing infrastructure for knowledge sharing and
mutual learning in the field of institutional change and gender equality across
Europe (Knowledge Sharing Hub, online survey tool for gender equality audit and
monitoring, and an evaluation framework for CoP collaborations and activities).
 Develop an adaptable support toolkit, training materials and audio-visual
resources for adopting best practices on gender equality by R&I organisations.

A significant contribution to Gender Equality policies at the national level stems from
GENDERACTION’s series of position papers and policy briefings with an emphasis on
networking and community building. Notably, GENDERACTION, flagged as a success
story by the Commission, recommended in its policy brief to properly integrate
gender equality policies in the ‘Strengthening the ERA’ part of the proposal for
Horizon Europe and in the future of the ERA.

GENDER-NET Plus is the first ERA-NET Cofund scheme dedicated to the promotion of
gender equality in research and innovation. It gathers 16 national organisations from
13 countries, committed to strengthening transnational collaborations towards a
common goal: advancing gender equality in research institutions and integrating the
gender dimension into research and innovation content and programmes. It
succeeded in launching a co-funded joint call of approximately EUR 11 million (of
which around EUR 8 million stems from consortium partners’ contributions)
supporting 13 innovative transnational projects. The projects integrate sex and
gender based analysis in research fields addressing intersections between
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5 (Gender equality), Goal 3 (Good Health and
Well-being), Goal 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and Goal 13 (Climate
Action)63.

GRANteD analyses the prevalence and causes of gender bias in research funding in
Europe and how the granting processes and outcomes can influence researchers’
academic careers. Based on empirical evidence, GRANteD will develop
recommendations for research funding organisations (RFOs) and research
performing organisations (RPOs) as well as for research policy makers.
Even though community-building was not its primary scope, the GEP project EQUAL-
IST has been outstanding in creating synergies with EURAXESS and many other EU-
funded projects. In the same networking spirit, in 2018, the REA and DG R&I co-
organised a cluster event, involving FP7 and H2020 GEP projects, which led to
synergies among the 15 participating projects. One example being PLOTINA’s final
conference in January 2020 to which the consortium invited other GEP projects
GENERA, SAGE, GEARING ROLES, R-I Peers to partake.

Building on this momentum, in March 2020, DG R&I and REA organised a co-creative
brainstorming workshop together with the Horizon 2020 GEPs projects, as well as
coordinators of related projects ACT, GENDERACTION, GE Academy and EFFORTI, on
'Fostering institutional change through Gender Equality Plans'. The aim of the
workshop was to assess the implementation of GEPs in Horizon 2020 in order to
prepare for Horizon Europe’s intensified focus on this institutional change policy
approach.

5.3.3. Education and trainings

The Hypatia project, exploring innovative approaches to encourage girls to study

science, has been flagged by the European Commission as a success story.

63
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

74
Hypatia produced an accessible, practical and ready-to-use digital collection of
activities (modules) for teachers, informal learning organisations, researchers and
industry. The modules focus on gender-inclusive ways of educating and
communicating STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics),
empowers teenagers to pursue STEM-related studies and explores the range of skills
that are needed for various STEM studies and careers open to young people. Every
activity contains gender and facilitation guidelines and can be used by teachers,
informal learning organisations, researchers and industry. The modules are
developed by science centres and tested by teenagers in different countries and are
available in 15 languages to ensure international appeal.

Looking at the university-level curricula, Baltic Gender developed a ‘Toolkit on

Gender-Sensitive Teaching Methods in Higher Education’. This collection of online
material aims at encouraging teaching staff to integrate the gender dimension into
their teaching. A variety of information is provided in the form of toolboxes, best
practice examples, manuals, guidelines and training tools.

SAGE developed Guidelines on integrating the gender dimension into research

content and curriculum.

Finally, GE Academy developed a set of trainings aimed at individuals from RPOs and
RFOs keen to learn how to design and implement a GEP or those who seek being
trained as a trainer on gender equality matters. GE Academy provides in-person
trainings, summer schools, webinars, online courses and workshops.

5.4. Recommendations

5.4.1. Policy recommendations

Under Horizon 2020, the integration of the gender dimension was, for the first time
in a Research Framework Programme, included under the ‘excellence’ award criterion
featuring in the proposal template and in the evaluation sub-criterion. It is important
to find ways to integrate the gender dimension in research content whenever
relevant, adapting to different disciplinary contexts and the specificities of each
academic field and institution.

Organisations should promote the value of integrating the gender dimension in

research content in terms of increasing research excellence notably by incorporating
this in their GEPs. Furthermore, to this end, the creation of detailed guidance with
concrete examples of gendered innovations, the introduction of incentives and/or the
establishment of possible sanctions, may help overcome barriers.

Significant gaps in the uptake of gender equality in research organisations in

different Member States are still present, particularly amongst those joining the EU
most recently. Notwithstanding, no country can afford to be complacent on gender
equality matters including countries where gender equality is historically more
established.

For example, EQUAL-IST revealed a certain ‘gender fatigue’ in Finland: legislation

introduced gender equality some time ago and as a result most entities have a
general plan in place. However, while GEPs exist at the university level, not all
departments have one and some resistance to consider gender issues at the level of
research and teaching with a male-dominated staff (as is still common in that
domain) was observed. Furthermore, EQUAL-IST’s experience confirms the need for

75
increased focus on the gender dimension in research and teaching, on the model of
projects like Baltic Gender.

Marking the 20 years of gender equality in Research and Innovation, the Finnish
Presidency policy conference organised on new challenges and opportunities for
gender equality in R&I in October 201964, through financial support from SwafS, has
generated increased attention for gender equality. Furthermore, a survey on GEP
implementation in academic institutions was launched by the Finnish Ministry which
will be used in their dialogues with universities. Such closer involvement and
endorsement by national authorities should be fostered to a greater extent.

5.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Many RPOs and RFOs across the EU don’t yet have a GEP in place. GEPs have been a
pioneering tool in terms of institutional change and as the most important tool for
Gender Equality policy, with Horizon Europe, the aim is to achieve sustainable
impact and create a multiplier effect. The European Commission’s new Gender
Equality Strategy 2020-202565, clearly indicates that the Commission will introduce
new measures to strengthen gender equality in Horizon Europe, such as the
possibility to require a gender equality plan from applicants.

The GEAR tool, as a basis for the design of GEPs, needs to be updated. The EFFORTI
project performed a European-wide research and case study work, generating a
significant source of evidence on potential impacts of all aspects of gender equality
for society, economy and science. This sound theoretical basis was then used to
create a ready-to-use IT toolbox, to assist in the evaluation of the impact of certain
measures, or provide recommendations towards a desired goal. Initially conceived to
address national level policies, the Impact Story Knowledge Base (dynamic toolbox
with step-by-step guidance for producing a roadmap) and Programme Theory
Generator for creating and visualising tailored programmes, can serve as a basis to
enhance the tool-set for the design of GEPs.

The Member States and regions should take into account equality between women
and men and the integration of the gender perspective in the management of
Structural Funds, including in support of R&I capacity building and actions in public
research bodies. The different perspective and needs of SMEs are yet another
example of tailoring that needs to be taken into account in designing a GEP.

In view of the increased importance given to Gender Equality in the von der Leyen
Commission, the significance attached to GEPs will certainly grow considerably in the
near future. Therefore, it would be of strategic importance to further develop tailored
guidance, advice and support, and provide easy access to the successful tools, best
practices as well as guidelines developed by the GEP projects and other gender
equality related SwafS projects.

Reviews of GEP projects have shown that the long-term impact of the structural
changes initiated cannot be judged right after the end of a project, and that devising
effective strategies to ensure the sustainability and institutionalisation of the GEPs
are crucial to achieve lasting transformation.

Several projects reported a major obstacle to institutional change due to a change in

top management of the implementing institution during the project. This can be a
crucial issue if the newly appointed management doesn’t consider gender equality as

64
Research and Innovation Excellence through gender equality: New pathways and challenges, Finnish Presidency
conference, 23-24 October 2019, Helsinki, Finland
65
European Commission website for 'Gender Equality Strategy'

76
a priority. To mitigate this risk, the most effective long-term strategy is the early
push for an institutional gender equality policy with defined and binding
commitments and targets. An integrated, institutionalised, policy in management
structures, and a GEP that is made publicly available, make successors likewise
accountable for gender equality matters.

An annual gender report should track and monitor the progress of each organisation
towards gender equality and its publication is an invaluable strategy for instilling
commitment while at the same time serves for dissemination purposes.

On a policy level, support emerged from the GEPs cluster event of 2018, the SwafS-
supported Finnish Presidency Conference of October 2019 and the March 2020 RTD-
REA workshop on 'Fostering institutional change through Gender Equality Plans: the
way forward towards Horizon Europe' to consider the uptake of gender equality
measures in applicant organisations to national and/or European funds as a
mandatory requirement.

This could be combined with a European award/certification/ranking system, which

would label RPOs according to their progress on gender equality. Furthermore, this
would foster a European-wide recognition of the importance of gender equality as a
factor for excellence. The project CASPER, takes a first step in this direction, in its
examination of the feasibility of establishing such a European award or certification
system for gender equality in research organisations.

77
6. INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES TOWARDS RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH
AND INNOVATION

6.1. Policy objectives

‘Early and continuous engagement of all stakeholders is essential for sustainable,

desirable and acceptable innovation.’66 The Responsible Research and Innovation
(RRI) approach supported by the European Commission since 2011 aims to
encourage societal actors to work together during the whole research and innovation
(R&I) process to better align R&I and its outcomes with the values, needs and
expectations of society.

In practice, RRI is implemented as a package, aiming to better engage society in

research and innovation processes, enabling easier access to scientific results,
favouring better uptake of the gender and ethics dimensions in research and
innovation content, and spreading good practices in formal and informal science
education.

The eight activity lines for SwafS in the Horizon 2020 specific programme67 take up
all these dimensions of RRI in various forms.

One of the key ways of working towards the objectives for SwafS, and ensuring
impact (and therefore value for money), is the implementation of institutional
changes in beneficiaries. This is evidenced by the Key Performance Indicator for
SwafS being ‘Percentage of research organisations funded implementing actions to
promote Responsible Research and Innovation, and number of institutional change
measures adopted as a result’.68

What does the EC mean by an ‘institutional change’? While this was put in broad
terms in early work programmes, by 2018-2020 it was described more precisely. In
2019, specific guidance was developed, based on observed practices and the
approach taken in the work programme 2018-2020, stating that an institutional
change is a change to how a beneficiary governs or structures itself. It is expected to
have meaningful impact within the institution concerned and intended to last beyond
the lifetime of project funding. Moreover, institutional changes towards RRI concern
one or more of the EC's five dimensions of RRI (public engagement, open access,
gender, ethics, science education), or manifest as an 'RRI package' covering all of
these five dimensions.

This chapter focuses on three of the constituents of the quadruple helix model
(firstly, higher education institutes and research funding and performing
organisations, secondly, industry and SMEs, and thirdly, regional and territorial
public authorities) and how they open up to the fourth constituent of the model
(citizens and civil society). A large part of these projects focus on implementing
institutional changes within the beneficiaries of the project funding, but others look
more widely at the systemic changes required to open up governance to society
more broadly. The final part of the chapter examines projects that sought to deepen
the knowledge base on RRI and enhance co-ordination between RRI actors.

66
Rome Declaration on Responsible Research and Innovation in Europe, November 2014
67
Regulation (EU) no 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
68
Horizon 2020 indicators

78
6.1.1. Research Funding and Performing Organisations and Higher Education
Institutes69

Both the 2014-2015 and 2016-2017 work programmes included topics that
supported ‘structural change’ or ‘opening’ research funding and performing
organisations to society. The work programme 2016-2017 pointed to a need to
overcome obstacles to engagement with society, for example due to lack of
knowledge or behaviour types and to focus on spreading good RRI practices in
Research Funding Organisations (RFOs) and Research Performing Organisations
(RPOs). This aim was pursued in two topics that ran in the work programme 2018-
2020, and in 2020 the focus narrowed somewhat from RRI to citizen science.

6.1.2. Industry

The work programme 2014-2015, addressed Responsible Research and Innovation in

an industrial context with a view to building the evidence base on how RRI can
improve development processes and the quality of the research and innovation
outcomes.

The work programme 2016-2017 sought to progress further in integrating RRI in

industrial contexts through two dedicated topics. Moreover, the work programme for
2020 includes a sub-topic focused on frugal innovation, bridging citizen science
approaches to industry/SMEs.

6.1.3. Territorial governance

While one project was funded from the 2014-2015 work programme on opening up
territorial governance to society, it was not until the work programme 2018- 2020
that specific focus was put on this area. The goal was to work towards the
establishment of self-sustaining R&I ecosystems, characterised by a high degree of
openness and responsiveness to local needs. This required relevant quadruple helix
R&I actors to work together. This inclusive approach ensures the buy-in of
stakeholders and results in greater sustainability on all levels. In particular, projects
focused on opening up territories through RRI and regional partners are expected to
update their smart specialisation strategies based on the broad input of society.

6.1.4. Knowledge base

Evidence from the Sixth Framework Programme Science and Society (S&S) and
Seventh Framework Programme Science in Society (SiS) programmes shows that
more consistent policy development in Science and Technology requires systematic
cooperation and a shared knowledge base on which European, national and sub-
national research and innovation policy decisions can be drawn from. In the work
programme 2014-2015, a topic was dedicated to fostering the sharing of ‘Science
with and for Society’ experience and know-how in Europe, and beyond, notably by
building a Knowledge Sharing Platform (KSP).

Several other topics in SwafS have focused on specific areas of interest, such as
monitoring the evolution and benefits of RRI, and global governance towards RRI.
Moreover, the work programme 2018-2020 included topics that encouraged
applicants to come up with areas of research that they thought were most needed
and to ‘connect the dots’ between disparate initiatives and knowledge bases

69
RFPOs should be understood broadly as organisations developing or funding activities in the field of R&I as one of their
objectives, including civil society organisations engaged in R&I.

79
6.2. Project portfolio
RRI is addressed in various SwafS work programmes, resulting in 35 funded projects
(2019 2-stage and 2020 calls not included) which for the purposes of this analysis
are categorised into four groups:

 Research Funding and Performing Organisations and Higher Education Institutes

(12 projects – EUR 29.4 million);
 Industry (6 projects – EUR 12.6 million);
 Territorial governance (10 projects – EUR 24.3 million)
 Knowledge base (7 projects – EUR 23.7 million).

Their combined budget is approximately EUR 90 million.

Fig. 18: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 19: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

80
 Fig. 20: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

Table 9: Institutional changes in Research Funding and Performing Organisations and Higher Education
Institutes RRI project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
ISSI-5-2014-2015 Supporting structural change in research organisations to promote Responsible Research
and Innovation (CSA)
EU: AT, DE(5),
EL, FR(2), IE, IT,
01-09-2015 RHINE-WAAL UNIVERSITY nucleus-
NUCLEUS 4.0 M DE MT, NL(2), UK(5)
31-08-2019 OF APPLIED SCIENCES project.eu
AC: GE, RS
TC: CN(2), ZA
EU: BG, DE, DK,
STARBIOS 01-05-2016 UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI FR, IT(2), PL,
3.5 M IT starbios2.eu
2 31-07-2020 DI ROMA TOR VERGATA SE, SI, UK
TC: BR, US
FRAUNHOFER
GESELLSCHAFT ZUR
01-06-2016 EU: AT, NL,
JERRI 2.4 M FÖRDERUNG DER DE jerri-project.eu
31-05-2019 UK(2)
ANGEWANDTEN
FORSCHUNG
EU: BG, DE, FR,
IT, NL(2), UK(2)
RRI- 01-09-2016 OSLOMET -
3.6 M NO AC: NO rri-practice.eu
PRACTICE 31-08-2019 STORBYUNIVERSITETET
TC: AU, BR, CN,
IN, US
GARRI-1-2014 Fostering RRI uptake in current research and innovation systems (CSA)
VLAAMSE INSTELLING
01-10-2015 EU: AT, BE, ES,
FoTRRIS 2.0 M VOOR TECHNOLOGISCH BE fotrris-h2020.eu
31-03-2018 FR, HU, IT
ONDERZOEK
SwafS-04-2016 Opening Research Organisations in the European Research Area (CSA)
EU: DE, EL, FI,
01-05-2017 UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI FR, IT, NL,
FIT4RRI 3.2 M IT fit4rri.eu
31-10-2020 DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA PT(3), UK(2)
AC: NO
01-05-2017 FUNDACIÓ CENTRE DE EU: CZ(2), DE, orion-
ORION 3.2 M ES
31-10-2021 REGULACIÓ GENÒMICA ES(2), IT, SE, UK openscience.eu
SwafS-05-2018-2019 Grounding RRI practises in RFOs and RPOs (CSA)
EU: BE, DK, EL,
01-01-2019 FONDATION EUROPÉENNE
GRACE 1.5 M FR ES, IT(2), NL, grace-rri.eu
31-12-2021 DE LA SCIENCE
SE, SI
EU: DE, ES,
01-01-2019 UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
GRRIP 1.5 M IE IE(2), IT, FR(2), grrip.eu
31-12-2022 CORK
NL, PT, UK(2)
EU: AT, BG, DE,
01-01-2020 UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DK, EL, ES, HR, cordis.europa.eu/
RESBIOS 1.5 M IT
31-12-2022 DI ROMA TOR VERGATA IT, PL, SI project/id/872146
AC: UA
EU: AT, BG,
ETHNA 01-01-2020 UNIVERSITAT JAUME I DE DE(2), DK, EE, cordis.europa.eu/
1.5 M ES
System 31-12-2022 CASTELLÓ ES, PT project/id/872360
AC: NO
EU: AT, ES,
01-02-2020 AUSTRIAN INSTITUTE OF cordis.europa.eu/
Co-Change 1.5 M AT FI(2), HU, NL
31-01-2023 TECHNOLOGY project/id/873112
AC: RS

81
 Table 10: Institutional changes in industry RRI project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
GARRI-1-2014 Fostering RRI uptake in current research and innovation systems (CSA)
DIALOGIK
GEMEINNÜTZIGE
01-01-2016 GESELLSCHAFT FÜR EU: AT, BE, BG, proso-
PROSO 1.4 M DE
28-02-2018 KOMMUNIKATIONS- UND DE, UK(2), PT project.eu
KOOPERATIONSFORSCHU
NG
GARRI-2-2015 Responsible Research and Innovation in industrial context (CSA)
SMART- 01-05-2016 EU: AT, DE, ES, projectsmartma
1.5 M AARHUS UNIVERSITET DK
map 31-10-2018 HU, IT(2), UK(2) p.eu
COMPAS 01-05-2016 WIRTSCHAFTSUNIVERSIT EU: BE(2), CY, innovation-
1.5 M AT
S 30-04-2019 ÄT WIEN ES, NL, UK compass.eu/
01-08-2016 TECHNISCHE EU: DE, IT, NL,
PRISMA 1.7 M NL rri-prisma.eu
31-07-2019 UNIVERSITEIT DELFT UK
SwafS-06-2017 Engaging industry – Champions for RRI in industrial sectors (CSA)
EU: AT, BE,
01-05-2018 WIRTSCHAFTSUNIVERSIT DE(3), ES(3), living-
LIV.IN 3.5 M AT
30-04-2021 ÄT WIEN HR, IT, NL, PL, innovation.net
RO, UK
SwafS-12-2017 Web of Innovations Value Chains and openings for RRI (RIA)
EU: AT(2), DE,
DK, ES, FI(2),
01-05-2018 MONTANUNIVERSITÄT
I AM RRI 3.0 M AT FR, IT(2), LT, iamrri.eu
30-04-2021 LEOBEN
NL, SI, UK
AC: NO

Table 11: Institutional changes in territorial governance RRI project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
ISSI-4-2015 On-line mechanisms for knowledge-based policy advice (RIA)
RESEARCH,
01-05-2016 TECHNOLOGY EU: AT, BE, EL(3),
ONLINE-S3 3.9 M ES onlines3.eu
30-06-2018 DEVELOPMENT FI, SI, SK, UK(3)
AND INNOVATION
SwafS-22-2018 Mobilising Research Excellence in EU Outermost Regions (CSA)
FORWARD
01-01-2019 GOBIERNO DE EU: FR(12), ES(6),
(Managed by 4.3 M ES forward-h2020.eu
31-21-2021 CANARIAS PT(5)
DG R&I)
SwafS-14-2018-2019-2020 Supporting the development of territorial Responsible Research and
Innovation (CSA)
01-01-2019 NORDLANDSFORS EU: AT(3), ES(4), IT
SeeRRI 2.0 M NO seerri.eu
30-06-2021 KNING AC: IL, NO(2)
EU: DE(2), ES, FR,
01-01-2019 WISSENSCHAFTSL PL
TeRRIFICA 2.0 M DE terrifica.eu
30-06-2022 ADEN BONN AC: RS
TC: BY
FONDATION EU: BE, BG(2), IT(2),
01-02-2019
TeRRItoria 2.0 M EUROPÉENNE DE FR DK(2), EL(2), RO territoriaproject.eu
31-01-2022
LA SCIENCE AC: NO(2)
ZENTRUM FUR
01-01-2020 SOZIALE EU: BE, CY(2), cordis.europa.eu/p
CHERRIES 2.0 M AT
31-12-2022 INNOVATION ES(4), IT, NL, SE(2) roject/id/872873
GMBH
AUSTRIAN EU: AT(3), ES,
01-01-2020 cordis.europa.eu/p
DigiTERRI 2.0 M INSTITUTE OF AT FR(3), SE(3)
31-12-2022 roject/id/873010
TECHNOLOGY AC: NO
AGENZIA PER LA
EU: AT, BE, EL(2),
01-01-2020 PROMOZIONE cordis.europa.eu/p
RRI2SCALE 2.0 M IT ES, NL(3)
31-12-2022 DELLA RICERCA roject/id/872526
AC: NO(2)
EUROPEA
FONDAZIONE EU: BE(5), ES(3),
01-01-2020 cordis.europa.eu/p
TRANSFORM 2.1 M GIANNINO IT IT(2),
31-12-2022 roject/id/872687
BASSETTI AC: NO TC: US
01-09-2020 TEKNOLOGIAN EU: BE, DE(2), cordis.europa.eu/p
TETRRIS 2.0 M FI
31-08-2023 TUTKIMUSKESKUS ES(2), FI, HU, NL roject/id/872550

82
 Table 12: Knowledge base RRI project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
ISSI-3-2015 Knowledge sharing platform (CSA)
EU: BE, CY(2),
cordis.europa.eu/
01-05-2016 CONSIGLIO NAZIONALE DK, EE, ES, IE,
MARINA 3.0 M IT project/id/710566
30-04-2019 DELLE RICERCHE FR, IT(2), PT, RO
AC: TR
SwafS-09-2016 Moving from constraints to openings, from red lines to new frames in Horizon 2020 (CSA)
EU: AT(2), CZ,
DE(2), DK,
NewHoR 01-05-2017 INSTITUT FÜR HÖHERE EE(2), ES, FI,
6.8 M AT newhorrizon.eu
RIzon 30-04-2021 STUDIEN FR(2), NL(5)
AC: NO
TC: CO, JM
SwafS-05-2017 New constellations of changing institutions and actors (CSA)
EU: BE(2), ES,
MULTI- 01-05-2018 FONDAZIONE ITALIANA
3.4 M IT FI, FR, IT(2), LU, multiact.eu
ACT 30-04-2021 SCLEROSI MULTIPLA
PL, PT
EU: AT(2), DE,
RiConfig 01-05-2018 FONDEN DK, ES, HU, IT,
3.5 M DK riconfigure.eu
ure 30-04-2021 TEKNOLOGIRADET NL(2)
TC: CO
SwafS-14-2017 A linked-up global world of RRI (RIA)
EU: DE(2), ES,
FR(2), IE(2), IT,
01-05-2018 UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
RRING 3.0 M IE LT, NL(4), UK(4) rring.eu
30-04-2021 CORK
AC: RS, UA
TC: JP, ZA
SwafS-21-2018 Advancing the monitoring of the evolution and benefits of Responsible Research and
Innovation (RIA)
FRAUNHOFER
GESELLSCHAFT ZUR EU: AT, DK,
Super_M 01-01-2019
3.0 M FÖRDERUNG DER DE ES(2), NL(2), RO super-morri.eu
oRRI 31-12-2023
ANGEWANDTEN AC: NO
FORSCHUNG
SwafS-20-2018-2019 Building the SwafS knowledge base (RIA)
KNOW-CENTER GMBH
On- 01-10-2019 RESEARCH CENTER FOR EU: AT, DE, PT, cordis.europa.eu/
1.0 M AT
MERRIT 31-03-2022 DATA-DRIVEN BUSINESS UK project/id/824612
& BIG DATA ANALYTICS

Table 13: Examples of institutional changes in the RRI dimensions

Theme Examples of institutional changes

Introduction of a new code of ethics
Ethics
Ethics and integrity training established for all personnel
Introducing an action plan on gender equality
Gender equality Establishing a ‘family room’ in the institution
Introducing training on implicit bias for senior management

Implementation of an open access policy plan

Open
access/Open Making data management plans compulsory
data Inclusion of open access measures in legal documents connected with funding decisions

Spin-off company created to link researchers with industry

Public Involvement of atypical stakeholders in strategy advisory councils
engagement
Recruitment of a citizen science facilitator in the institution

Establishment of an action plan on science education

Science Introduction of PhD training on communication to diverse audiences
education
Publication of educational materials on thematic issues on an institutional website

Establishment of a new information centre to engage with the public

Full RRI package Publication of a booklet on RRI recommendations for a faculty Implementation of an RRI
policy development action plan

83
6.3. Achievements

As previously stated, the key performance indicator for SwafS is the number of
institutional change actions (see examples in
Table 13: Examples of institutional changes in the RRI dimensions): ‘Percentage of research
organisations funded implementing actions to promote Responsible Research and
Innovation, and number of institutional change measures adopted as a result’.70

To this end, REA.B.5 unit ‘Spreading Excellence, Widening Participation, Science with
and for Society’ launched an exercise in 2019, in close co-operation with DG R&I unit
‘Open Science’, to gather data from SwafS projects focused on implementing
institutional changes towards RRI in beneficiary organisations.

The results of this exercise showed that 238 individual institutional change actions
had been or were being implemented by this part of the SwafS portfolio, and
suggest that SwafS will well and truly surpass its target of 100 institutional changes
in beneficiaries by the end of the programme71.

Fig. 21 and Fig. 22 show the results for a sample of 12 RRI projects 72, by country
and by RRI dimension.

Fig. 21: Number of institutional changes produced by 12 RRI projects in Member States (blue), Associated
Countries (green) and Third Countries (red).

70
Horizon 2020 indicators
71
This data collection exercise only covered projects in the RRI portfolio focused on institutional changes, and did not
cover projects dedicated to gender equality, ethics, or open access/open data, which, to various degrees, focus also on
institutional changes.
72
The 12 projects considered are: STARBIOS 2, RRI-Practice, FoTRRIS, FIT4RRI, ORION, RIConfigure, JERRI, SeeRRI,
TeRRIFICA, NUCLEUS, PROSO, GRACE.

84
 Fig. 22: Number of institutional changes produced by 12 RRI projects in the RRI dimensions.

6.3.1. Research Funding and Performing Organisations and Higher Education

Institutes

Projects funded under this category aim to change the institutional practices and
cultures in research funding and research performing organisations (RFPOs) with a
view to fostering and embedding RRI on a sustained basis.

The projects aiming to open up RFPOs use a variety of approaches and methods in
implementing institutional changes towards RRI. These include identifying best
practices and analysing obstacles and barriers in successfully implementing RRI
principles. As such, one of the main outcomes of the portfolio of projects is a strong
evidence-based inventory of impactful practices for the uptake of RRI. They show
that different changes require varying amounts of effort, that changes in some
institutions are easier to implement than in another, and that all manner of changes
can be impactful depending on the context. For many of the projects in SwafS, the
changes introduced represent significant steps forward towards RRI for the
organisations concerned.

For the purposes of the analysis of the group of projects targeting institutional
changes in higher education institutes and RFPOs, the projects are grouped
according to four main areas of focus: good practices in RFPOs; setting up action
plans; training and education on RRI and finally those with a particularly innovative
approach.

6.3.1.1. Good practices in RFPOs

NUCLEUS developed a new understanding of engagement in universities and

scientific institutions. Its main goal was to implement this understanding by
embedding RRI in the governance and culture of research institutions across Europe,
China and South Africa. The NUCLEUS project tested the principles of RRI through
experiments in ten research institutions across Europe, as well as in South Africa and
China (presented in chapter 1 in the context of international outreach).

85
These experiments involved implementing approaches and activities that would help
overcome institutional obstacles and demonstrate the benefits of RRI to each partner
institution. NUCLEUS developed a web-tool for RRI implementation.

RRI Practice reviewed RRI-related work in 22 RFPOs and developed objectives,

targets and indicators for each organisation. One of the main outcomes of the
project is the RRI Handbook for organisations that are considering implementing
policies or practices related to RRI. Together with the NUCLEUS project, they
organised the ‘Pathways to Transformation’ conference.

The conference explored the pathways that institutions may follow towards being
more socially responsive, with two main questions acting as the driving force: firstly,
what can research performing organisations learn from the projects’ institutional RRI
experiments (‘Practical Pathways’)? And secondly, how can research policy
incentivise stakeholders to contribute to more responsive science and innovation
systems (‘Policy Pathways’)? The ‘Pathways declaration’ emerging from the
conference, signed by more than 13 projects funded under SwafS, called for RRI to
remain a central objective in EU R&I and for the EU to continue to pursue its leading
role in this effort (section 6.4 outlines the recommendations put forward for the
European Commission). This formed the basis for a ‘Joint Declaration on
Mainstreaming RRI across Horizon Europe’ recently published in the Journal of
Responsible Innovation.

JERRI orchestrated a deep RRI transition process within two major European
Research and Technology Organisations: the German Fraunhofer Gesellschaft and
the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research.

Transition roadmaps were developed detailing pathways to the envisaged long-term

goals of both entities to guide the process beyond the project’s lifetime as well as
producing best practices (Deliverable 9.1: Global RRI Goals and Practices).

6.3.1.2. Setting up action plans

After analysing where their institutions stand in terms of existing RRI practices,
many of the projects drafted action plans to support their organisations in
implementing structural changes.

STARBIOS 2 produced six action plans geared to putting in place structural changes
in one or more of the RRI dimensions in partner institutions based in Europe and
developed three action plans for non-European partners, all active in the field of the
biosciences. STARBIOS 2 is in the process of developing an RRI model for the
biosciences, with the potential of contributing to structural changes in bioscience
institutions in Europe and beyond. Examples of institutional changes include the
implementation of an open access policy at one of the RPOs, the setting up of an
ethical commission at a higher education partner, and the creation of a start-up to
connect the university’s research to enterprises: InNutRes (Responsible Innovation
in Nutrition). Finally, STARBIOS 2 organised a session on ‘Epigenetics in Infection,
Diets and Environment: Responsible Research and Innovation’ at the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting 2019 in
Washington DC73.

GRRIP focuses on embedding RRI practices through action plans in five RFPOs active
in the marine and maritime sectors. GRRIP aims to contribute to the implementation
of RRI in partner institutions by providing evidence of societal, democratic, economic

73
STARBIOS2 at AAAS Annual Meeting 2019

86
 and scientific impacts of institutional changes through a monitoring and evaluation
methodology developed in co-creation mode with input from all quadruple helix
stakeholders.

Actions plans are also the focus of GRACE, which involves ten RFPOS in Europe. Each
institution will develop customised RRI profiles for implementing RPFOs based on
their needs, expectations and specific characteristics, which they will then
implement. The novelty of the GRACE project is that these action plans will lead to
an 8 year RRI roadmap for each implementing RPFO. GRACE intends to co-organise
a side event at the III International Triple Helix Summit in Bologna (November
2020) together with another project funded under the same topic as part of its
‘additional dissemination obligations74’, foreseen for some SwafS projects.

ETHNA System started in January 2020 and will develop and implement an Ethics
Governance System for grounding good practices in RRI in Higher Education and
Funding and Research Centres. The project will implement and validate a new formal
organisational structure within the management structure of its six partner
institutions.

6.3.1.3. Training and education on RRI

Embedding RRI in institutions and implementing structural changes along the RRI
dimensions can only take place if the organisations themselves are comfortable with
what RRI entails and know about the tools available in the implementation of RRI-
related changes. Educating future researchers to be attuned to RRI is also important,
as is grounding RRI in higher education curricula.

Many projects focus on the training aspect, not only in capacity building for staff in
higher education to teach RRI but also in training the RFPOs by providing tools,
guidelines etc. See EnRRICH and HEIRRI included in chapter 3: Science Education, in
relation to RRI in higher education curricula.

FIT4RRI focuses on the training of RFPOs through workshops, with an online RFPO
training programme to follow. Similarly, ORION is creating training content for
researchers and professional staff at funding agencies on RRI and Open Science
concepts, practices and tools.

To date, ORION produced case studies, checklists, factsheets, podcasts, and are
planning to launch a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC).

6.3.1.4. Innovative approaches

Embedding RRI creates a need for intermediary structures, reconnecting established

knowledge institutions with broader society for the co-creation of local answers to
global challenges. Several projects adopted an innovative approach to the challenge
of embedding RRI in RFPOs.

FoTRRIS developed and tested such an intermediary structure: a Co-RRI

Competence Cell. This was prototyped in five regional case studies on various
challenges, including renewable energy, refugees, and women with disabilities, local
economy, sustainable food and material scarcity. FoTRRIS designed and

74
The 2018-2020 work programme foresees additional dissemination obligations: consortia must make active efforts to
freely share, in a timely manner and as appropriate, the research strategies, methodologies, and raw and analysed data
deriving from their activities (including any evaluation activities), with the other projects funded by SwafS subject to
these same additional dissemination obligations. Applicants must acknowledge and incorporate these obligations in their
proposal, outlining the efforts they will make towards this in Annex 1 of the proposal. The respective option of Article
29.1 of the Model Grant Agreement applies.

87
implemented co-RRI competence cells within its partner organisations, with changes
to these organisations’ governance in the way research and innovation practice
occurs. These have resulted in commitments from the organisations to promote and
sustain their institutional changes, to varying degrees depending on the specifics of
the institutional context (e.g. their business model and size). Furthermore, FoTRRIS
produced a set of highly innovative materials, including a co-RRI ‘cook book’ to
assist stakeholders in implementing RRI.

Co-change, which recently commenced, centres on the concept of change labs to

generate transformative capacity for institutional change in terms of practices,
procedures, rules and norms.

6.3.2. Industry

The 2015 topic dedicated to ‘Responsible Research and Innovation in the industrial
context'75, resulted in the funding of PRISMA, SMART-map and COMPASS.

The goal of PRISMA was to identify lessons on implementing RRI in industry ranging
from small enterprises to large corporations and universities. The structured
methodology was the result of eight pilots in companies active in
emerging technologies (nanotechnologies, synthetic biology, Internet of things, and
autonomous vehicles). PRISMA produced a number of practical tools and promising
practices for companies to include RRI in their (business) strategies, notably a
roadmap consisting of a 6-step approach for defining an RRI-strategy. The PRISMA
R&I toolkit is geared for SMEs aspiring to develop innovative products and services
with which societal needs are addressed together with a contribution to
environmental and economic sustainability. The project also designed a MOOC on
‘CSR and RRI: Building tomorrow’s responsible firms’.

A re-run of the course is planned in 2020. The project team were very active with
close to 30 publications produced in journals and conference articles. Finally, the
project aims at sustainability through the development of CEN (the European
Committee for Standardisation) standards on responsible industry based on the
outcomes of the project’s work.

SMART-map defined and implemented concrete roadmaps for the responsible

development of technologies and services in three fields: precision medicine,
synthetic biology and 3D printing in biomedicine. Industrial Dialogues i.e.
collaborative dialogue between industry and societal actors, resulted in the co-design
of a SMART map to help companies address questions of social and environmental
responsibility in their innovation processes.

COMPASS developed an interactive online platform, the Responsible Innovation

Compass, deploying RRI visions and roadmaps for three innovation fields
(healthcare, nanotechnology, ICT) with a particular focus on SMEs. The Responsible
Innovation Self-Check Tool for SMEs is a key outcome, providing concrete inputs and
examples on how to translate RRI principles into actual business practices.

Falling under the 2014 topic ‘Fostering RRI uptake in current research and
innovations systems’76, PROSO aimed to foster the engagement of citizens and ‘third
sector organisations’, notably non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil
society organisations (CSOs), in Europe’s research and innovation processes across
three domains of research and innovation: nanotechnology, food and health and the
bio-economy. The PROSO Support Tool outlined practices that encourage the

75
SwafS work programme 2014-2015
76
SwafS work programme 2014-2015

88
engagement of citizens and third sector actors in publicly-funded research and in
research and innovation policy in the European Union.

LIV.IN launched a Virtual Community Platform to co-create new solutions that are
beneficial to society and create new business opportunities in the areas of smart
homes, smart health and designing responsible, sustainable solutions for future
living. The platform was created on the basis of the RRI Community Building
Handbook, a guide to the design, development and maintenance of a sectoral virtual
community. The initiative gives citizens the chance to be involved in the design of
technology that will shape their future lives while giving industry the possibility to
respond directly to changes and the needs of users and expectations of society 77.

I AM RRI is investigating the additive manufacturing (AM)78 innovation network in

order to develop a dynamic model of webs of innovation value chains in AM based on
open innovation considerations and stage-gate approaches to include openings for
responsible research and innovation. Additive manufacturing in the automotive and
medical industry will serve as pilot cases to refine and validate the model 79.

6.3.3. Territorial governance

Complementing the European Commission’s guidance80 on the methodological design

of RIS3 (research and innovation strategies for smart specialisation), ONLINE-S3
developed an e-policy platform hosting a toolbox consisting of 28 tools covering the
complete RIS3 process, a roadmap and a 6-phase guide to assist national and
regional authorities in the EU elaborate their smart specialisation agenda. Online-
S3’s web services and tools to implement RIS3 methodologies were tested in four
regions: Scotland (United Kingdom), Central Macedonia (Greece), Galicia (Spain),
and Northern Netherlands. Over 12,000 users were involved, of which over 1,000
contributed with suggestions and conveyed high levels of satisfaction 81.

The following projects are supported by topic SwafS-14-2018-2019-2020 that will

likely see around 10 per cent of all EU regions developing more open and
collaborative territorial governance through institutional and governance changes by
taking a Responsible Research and Innovation approach.

TeRRItoria will connect RRI to the general strategy of Smart Specialisation of regions
by developing a set of transformative experiments 82 and implementing institutional
changes in five European selected territories in order to embed RRI in their planning
process. The territories, represented by a territorial organisation, are located in
Central Macedonia (Greece), Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Trøndelag (Norway), Region of
North-East Romania and the Municipality of Gabrovo (Bulgaria). So far, TeRRItoria
has produced an inventory of 43 RRI Governance Innovation Practices, on the basis
of good practices observed in other RRI projects in the design and implementation of
five transformative experiments foreseen.

SeeRRI aims to establish a foundation for self-sustaining R&I ecosystems in Europe

by developing a framework for integrating the RRI approach into regional
development policies in three European territories: Nordland in Norway; B30 in
Catalonia; Ecoplus from Lower Austria. The aim is to provide a set of core principles
and a roadmap that regions can use to develop a sustainable research and

77
Liv.In website
78
AM is a key enabling technology in high value manufacturing
79
I am RRI website
80
Guide on Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation
81
Intelligence and co-creation in Smart Specialisation Strategies: Towards the next stage of RIS3
82
TeRRItoria Project experiments

89
innovation ecosystem based on RRI principles83. SeeRRI published an article
explaining how organisations can become responsible innovators and demonstrating
that practicing RRI may give companies a competitive advantage 84.

In October 2019, SeeRRI and TeRRItoria partook in the European Week of Regions
and Cities, in a workshop on ‘In Science for Citizens: how science meets regions and
cities’, emphasising the importance of involving all actors in the ‘quadruple helix’ in
transition processes.85

TeRRIFICA will increase competencies for climate action and climate change
adaptation in six pilot cities and regions: Barcelona (Spain), Brittany, Normandy and
Pays de Loire (France), South Oldenburg (Germany), Poznań Agglomeration
(Poland), Minsk (Belarus) and Belgrade (Serbia). TeRRIFICA produced a guide on
engagement and co-creation aimed at fostering stakeholders’ engagement and co-
creation within the context of climate mitigation and adaptation. In the knowledge
gathering phase, it examined the local contexts in the six pilot regions 86 and
identified case studies of community-academia research partnership related to
climate change, highlighting common elements for the development of future climate
actions87.

The outcomes of this project should be particularly interesting to future work on a

climate-focused mission in Horizon Europe and the European Green Deal.

RRI2SCALE aims to implement successful regional R&I policies that spearhead

sustainable development and economic growth while advancing inclusiveness in four
regions: Hordaland (Norway), Overijssel (Netherlands), Crete (Greece) and Galicia
(Spain). RRI2SCALE will examine the integration of RRI principles within the regions
as well as the key components of territorial R&I ecosystems. This will be followed by
a large-scale citizen survey on RRI principles and their interaction with R&I
ecosystems. All the project’s results, together with a training compendium, will form
the RRI2SCALE Toolkit which can be used for replicating the move towards RRI by
other territories.

TRANSFORM will bring Lombardy (Italy), Brussels (Belgium) and Catalonia (Spain)
together to design, test and disseminate participatory research agenda setting;
design for social innovation; and citizen science as co-creation methodological
frameworks for the implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategies (RIS3).
Regional governments involved in TRANSFORM will adopt RRI approaches in their
R&I policies and actions including integration into the strategic roadmaps for the
implementation of RRI within RIS3.

CHERRIES will support healthcare research and innovation policy and pilot actions by
interlinking RRI, demand-side policy and territorial innovation models including
smart specialisation. This pilot innovation process will be implemented and tested in
the territories of Murcia (Spain), Örebro (Sweden) and the Republic of Cyprus.

DigiTeRRI will develop a framework for the responsible transition of traditional

industrial regions into digitised R&I ecosystems together with the impacted
industries, territorial authorities and citizens affected in Värmland (Sweden), Région
Grand Est (France) and Styria (Austria). DigiTeRRI will produce a strategy for

83
SeeRRI website
84
'The responsible learning organization: Can Senge (1990) teach organizations how to become responsible innovators?'
85
18th European Week of Regions and Cities, 12-15 October 2019
86
TeRRIFICA 'Report on institutional framework conditions, relevant local and regional processes, instruments and co-
creation factors related to or adaptable for climate action'
87
TeRRICICA ‘Case studies report’

90
implementing resilient R&I ecosystems for digitalised industries in traditionally
industrial-oriented territories.

TETRRIS, due to start later in 2020, will support four European pilot territories to
integrate RRI practices into their territorial research and innovation systems and
development approaches. The regions are Tampere (Finland), Karlsruhe (Germany),
Cantabria (Spain) and Szeged-Timișoara (Hungary-Romania). TETRRIS will also
develop tools and good practices and policy recommendations for other European
territories to integrate RRI in their regional development.

Looking further afield, FORWARD (managed by DG R&I), launched as part of the

EU’s strategy for outermost regions, aims to foster research excellence in EU
Outermost Regions (ORs). The project involves the regional governments from the
nine ORs in charge of R&I regional policies together with key R&I actors.

FORWARD will perform an initial analysis of R&I ecosystems and, based on these
results, will put in place tailored actions including a joint strategy and thematic
action plans, capacity building and networking activities, as well as approaches for
connecting research and policy making. Importantly, and in line with SwafS,
emphasis is placed on the involvement of civil society organisations within these
processes.

6.3.4. Knowledge base

MARINA developed a Knowledge Sharing Platform in order to facilitate the

cooperation of those involved in marine issues and ensure the integration of citizens’
ideas. The platform includes a section on tools and good practices for RRI
implementation88. Now that the project is over, the project team guarantees the
sustainability of the communities federated in the platform and of the platform itself.

NewHoRRIzon sets out to promote the acceptance of RRI in Horizon 2020 and
beyond. It will work out the conceptual and operational basis to fully integrate RRI
into European and national research and innovation (R&I) funding practices. In order
to accomplish this goal, NewHoRRIzon established 19 Social Labs, each dedicated to
a different part of H2020 (e.g. ERC, LEIT ICT, Societal Challenge 6) 89. For every
section of H2020, different stakeholders gather in a Social Lab to define the social
challenges at stake and develop social experiments to overcome them.
NewHoRRIzon also analysed the specifics of the current use and practices of RRI
within the various Horizon 2020 programme lines.

One important outcome of the project is the Societal Readiness Thinking Tool, a
practical online tool that can be used by research projects and funders to ensure that
they have adequately taken into account different aspects of responsibility through
the research and innovation process, so as to ensure that the outcomes of the
research and innovation will align with the needs, values and expectations of society
(‘societal readiness’).

MULTI-ACT aims to increase the impact of health research on people with brain
diseases through patient participation. Starting with multiple sclerosis as its first
case study, MULTI-ACT will create and implement a new model allowing for the
effective cooperation of all relevant stakeholders in defining the scope of health
research as well as new metrics for the evaluation of its results90.

88
Marina website
89
New Horizon website
90
MULTI-ACT website

91
So far, MULTI-ACT produced a Master Scorecard for use at the beginning or during
the development of a research initiative, engaging multiple stakeholders in defining
impact indicators towards a given mission through a collective bottom-up approach.

RiConfigure aims to include civil society in the innovation process in order to let
innovative solutions flourish and in doing so bring different voices together in new
types of collaborations to avoid blind spots and exploit the specific competences of
the various actors91. RiConfigure produced a social lab methodology manual for
designing and implementing social labs.

RRING aims to bring RRI to the global level to promote mutual learning and
collaboration in RRI through a global RRING community network and a global Open
Access RRI knowledge base92. An important part of RRING is its bottom-up approach
to share and engage in learning about responsibility, aligned to the states’
commitments to implement UNESCO’s Recommendation on Science and Scientific
Researchers (2017).

On 13 February 2020, RRING ran a workshop at the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting in Seattle (USA), which brought
together various stakeholders of science technology and innovation systems for
learning on responsibility in research and innovation.

FP7’s MoRRI project (2014-2018) conceptualised and implemented the first RRI
monitoring system in Europe, consisting of more than 36 indicators for the key areas
of RRI93. SUPER_MoRRI builds on this work, ensuring sustained data collection,
curation, further assessment and refinement of the MoRRI indicators.

Super_MoRRI aims to continue cross-European data collection on the evolution and

benefits of RRI, enhance understanding of its societal, democratic, economic and
scientific benefits and ultimately improve the monitoring system.

In addition, it will create a user-friendly, interactive dashboard94. The annual event

in Leiden in January 2020 gathered 14 other SwafS projects, focused on institutional
change, the territorial dimension of open and responsible research and innovation,
and citizen science95.

The project has been particularly active in developing an active ecosystem of sharing
and learning, so as to inform and co-develop the indicator system with SwafS
stakeholders.

ON-MERRIT, targets an equitable scientific system that rewards merit rather than
the ‘Matthew Effect’96 of cumulative advantage.

ON-MERRIT deploys a combination of qualitative and computational methods that

use stakeholder participation and co-design to engage researchers, industry, policy
makers and citizens in examining the extent of the Matthew Effect in key RRI
elements with the aim of providing evidence-based policy recommendations for
stakeholders on mitigate these effects. ON-MERRIT was the only project to be
supported from the 2018 call of SwafS-20-2018-2019.

91
RiConfigure website
92
RRING website
93
'Monitoring the evolution and benefits of responsible Research and Innovation'
94
Super_MoRRI website
95
Super_MoRRI events
96
The idea that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer is a social phenomenon linked to the Matthew effect.
Essentially, it refers to the concept that those who already have status can gain more, whereas those without status
struggle more to gain it. In other words, it is the accumulated advantage.

92
6.4. Recommendations

6.4.1. Policy recommendations

NUCLEUS highlighted in its policy brief the importance of impressing upon

stakeholders the meaning and principles of RRI rather than focusing on the term
itself, which can create unnecessary barriers.
The Pathways Declaration, recently published in the Journal of Responsible
Innovation as a ‘Joint declaration on mainstreaming RRI across Horizon Europe’ 97,
calls for the funding of a hub on RRI to ensure quality in the mainstreaming of RRI,
co-creation, public engagement and citizen science in the next Framework
Programme. This hub should build on and further cultivate the RRI knowledge base.
It should advise, train, consult, assess and provide quality control and serve as a
resource for those who include RRI-related activities in Horizon Europe projects.

It should also provide experts for the assessment of these aspects in proposals and
project activities as well as for relevant committees and boards.

RRI-Practice produced a policy brief echoing some ideas from the Pathways
Declaration, notably establishing a network of train-the-trainers in all Member States
to train stakeholders in RRI. The project also proposed that the European
Commission launch a tender for professional marketing, dissemination and training
of RRI.

It proposed for DG R&I to fund a conference with a global scope, with the goal of
developing a Declaration on Research Quality and Impact (in a similar format as the
Rome Declaration on RRI). Another idea proposed was setting up an annual RRI
award to incentivise and promote RRI.

With respect to regional governance, the European Commission should envisage

greater synergies between the SwafS calls and ESF (European Social Fund), ERDF
(European Regional Development Fund) and Erasmus+. RRI practices, for example
stakeholder engagement, should be part of the evaluation for Structural Funds, and
RRI is a key tool towards opening up cohesion policy to the input of society. ONLINE
S3’s platform and other project outputs of potential interest to regional governments
should be referenced on the European Commission’s Smart Specialisation Platform.
While progress has made in terms of the participation of Civil Society Organisations
(CSOs) in Horizon 2020 projects, efforts should continue to ensure the inclusion of
this group of actors. Appropriate funding mechanisms to encourage CSOs to partake
in quadruple helix collaborations should be promoted, notably the cascading grant
mechanism, a useful instrument to engage such stakeholders.

Furthermore, a clearer definition of CSOs in the context of particular topics would be

commendable and could help clarify the types of CSOs expected. Finally, a
compendia of ‘best practices’ should be made available to the research community at
large, including effective methodologies to support the active participation of CSOs
within quadruple helix collaborations98.

6.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

The Pathways Declaration (recently published as ‘Joint declaration on mainstreaming

RRI across Horizon Europe’) pointed to the following specific recommendations to the
European Commission in relation to strengthening RRI in Horizon Europe:

97
Joint declaration on mainstreaming RRI across Horizon Europe
98
RiConfigure Policy Brief

93
 In cases in which RRI-related concepts are included in future topics, applicants
should outline how their projects relate to RRI, based on guidelines for how to
embed RRI effectively and to measure societal impact.

 Clear criteria for assessing RRI-related concepts should be communicated to

applicants and evaluators.

 Interdisciplinary collaboration should be encouraged. For instance, including

researchers from Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) usually increases the
quality of RRI actions.

 Treat RRI components as research, for example the methods and results of RRI
measures in an integrated project should be published.

 Open science, citizen science and co-creation agendas should be considered in a

broader perspective with reference to RRI.

 The different advisory boards and committees in Horizon Europe, especially in

relation to emerging science and technologies, as well as the mission-oriented
programmes, should be well-versed in RRI.

NewHoRRIzon may potentially have a significant impact on future R&I policy in

Europe. EC staff should be more involved in the pilots and an EC contact person
nominated for each social lab.

NewHoRRIzon advises a shift from RRI being a general ‘cross-cutting issue’ to

becoming an explicit policy goal, outlined in clear guidelines for action and that the
European Commission should develop and actively disseminate information on RRI
implementation tools99.

Finally, NewHoRRIzon recommends including the Societal Readiness Thinking Tool in

the Horizon Europe evaluation process by requiring applicants to include project-
specific RRI-related questions and reflections with the support of this tool. This step
would encourage researchers to reflect on their work in relation to societal needs.

With respect to regional governance specifically, in collaboration with EU services

dealing with regional policy, the link between the region’s design and
implementation of smart specialisation strategies and projects funded under Horizon
Europe geared towards developing RRI practices in RIS3 strategies should be
strengthened.

A conference organised in February 2020 by the Commission’s Directorate-General

for Regional and Urban Policy on ‘Engaging citizens for good governance in Cohesion
Policy’, aimed to identify new solutions and approaches to better involve citizens in
the decision-making process related to the implementation of the cohesion policy100.

However, there appeared to be little knowledge of the projects supported in SwafS

that are showing how to do this in practice and this know-how should be better
exploited across Commission services.

99
Second NewHoRRIzon Policy Brief
100
High-level conference “Engaging citizens for good governance in Cohesion Policy”, Brussels, 6 February 2020

94
7. CITIZEN SCIENCE AND CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT

7.1. Policy objectives

The ‘Integrating Society in Science and Innovation’ call of the initial SwafS 2014-
2015 work programme included topics on public outreach and multi-actor
engagement for scenario building. The 2016-2017 work programme saw three topics
focus specifically on the involvement of citizens (alongside other actors) in co-
producing research content.

In parallel, wider policy developments intensified efforts in this domain. In 2015,

former Commissioner Moedas identified three strategic priorities, described in Open
innovation, Open science, Open to the world (the three O’s strategy), which
proposed inter alia that ‘many more actors will take part (in the research process) in
different ways and the traditional methods of organising and rewarding research will
also see many changes’101. One important dimension of open science is citizen
science, envisioned as being ‘linked with outreach activities, science education or
various forms of public engagement with science as a way to promote Responsible
Research and Innovation’. In 2016, the Council102 recognised citizen science as an
open science priority and in April 2018, the Open Science Policy Platform (OSPP)
included citizen science as one of eight Open Science ambitions.

Furthermore, partly in response to the interim evaluation of Horizon 2020, the SwafS
work programme 2018-2020 included a strategic orientation on ‘exploring and
supporting citizen science’, and developed a portfolio approach to work towards this
orientation.

The SwafS work programme 2018-2020 focuses on the meanings, mechanisms and
challenges facing citizen science from local to European and global levels, learning
from on-going experiences and innovative grassroots initiatives. In addition, the aim
is to explore how citizen science can act as a catalyst to develop scientific skills and
competences, act as a tool for informal and formal science education of young
people and adults, counteract perceived anti-intellectual attitudes in society, raise
the scientific literacy of European citizens, as well as promote social inclusion and
employability.

Citizen science is blooming across scientific disciplines. It has the potential to bring a
wide variety of benefits to researchers, citizens, policy makers and society and
across the research and innovation cycle. It can make science more socially relevant,
accelerate and enable production of new scientific knowledge, help policy makers
monitor regulatory implementation and compliance, increase public awareness about
science and ownership of policy making, and increase prevalence of evidence-based
policy making103. To this end, the European Commission aimed to support and
showcase excellent examples of citizen science across scientific disciplines
(presented in section 7.3.2).

At the same time, there are difficulties setting up citizen science initiatives in terms
of choosing the optimum methodologies; quality assurance and validation of the
outcomes; managing large numbers of volunteers for many months or even years
and keeping them motivated and responding to their questions. To this end, the

101
Commissioner Moedas' speech at the conference ‘A new start for Europe: Opening up to an ERA of Innovation’
102
Council conclusions on the transition towards an Open Science system
103
SwafS Work programme 2018-2020

95
European Commission supported a mutual learning space where citizen science
projects and participants can exchange experiences and successful strategies,
resulting in the Coordination and Support Action ‘Exploring and supporting citizen
science’ in the 2018-2020 work programme. Furthermore, the growth of citizen
science brings with it a need to understand its breadth and consequences. This led to
a topic in 2019 dedicated to consolidating and expanding the knowledge base on
citizen science in terms of understanding how it is conducted, the actors including
incentives and disincentives for their involvement, good practices, the enablers and
barriers for citizen science as well as its effects on R&I systems.

7.2. Project portfolio

Citizen Science is addressed across topics in various SwafS work programmes,

resulting in 22 funded projects (2020 call not included) which for the purposes of
this analysis are categorised as ‘deepening the evidence as well as practice and
training on co-design and co-creation’ (6 projects) and ‘doing citizen science’ (16
projects). Their combined budget is approximately EUR 58.3 million with EUR 17.6
million for the first group and EUR 40.7 million for the ‘doing citizen science’
projects.
Fig. 23: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

Fig. 24: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

96
 Fig. 25: Number of partners in Third Countries (TC)

Table 14: Co-creation project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
ISSI-2-2014 Citizens and multi-actor engagement for scenario building (CSA)
EU: AT, BE(2),
BG, CY, CZ, DE,
EL, ES, FI, FR,
CIMULA 01-06-2015 FONDEN HR, HU, IE, IT,
3.3 M DK cimulact.eu
CT 31-03-2018 TEKNOLOGIRADET LT, LU, LV, MT,
NL, PL, PT, RO,
SE, SK, UK
AC: CH, NO
SwafS-13-2017 Integrating society in science and innovation – An approach to co-creation (RIA)
EU: AT (2), DK,
SCALING 01-05-2018 TECHNISCHE ES, FR, NL, PL,
4.0 M DE scalings.eu
S 31-07-2021 UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN UK(2) AC:
CH
EU: BE(2),
DE(2), DK(2),
01-05-2018 EL, ES, FR, IE,
SISCODE 4.0 M POLITECNICO DI MILANO IT siscodeproject.eu
30-04-2021 IT, NL, PL, PT(2),
UK
AC: RS
SwafS-15-2018-2019 Exploring and supporting citizen science (CSA)
MUSEUM FÜR
NATURKUNDE - LEIBNIZ-
EU: AT(2), BE,
EU- INSTITUT FÜR
01-01-2019 DE, ES, IE, LT,
Citizen.S 2.0 M EVOLUTIONS- UND DE eu-citizen.science
31-12-2021 NL, PT, SE,
cience BIODIVERSITÄTSFORSCH
UK(3)
UNG AN DER HUMBOLDT-
UNIVERSITÄT ZU BERLIN
SwafS-18-2018 Taking stock of the application of the precautionary principle in R&I (RIA)
EU: AT, BG,
01-01-2019 UNIVERSITEIT DE(4), DK, IT, recipes-
RECIPES 2.0 M NL
31-12-2021 MAASTRICHT NL project.eu/
AC : NO
SwafS-17-2019 Consolidating and expanding the knowledge base on citizen science (RIA)
EU: AT, BE,
01-12-2019 cordis.europa.eu/
CS-Track 2.3 M THE MOFET INSTITUTE IL DE(2), EL, ES(2),
30-11-2022 project/id/872522
FI

97
 Table 15: Citizen science project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
ISSI-1-2014-2015 Pan–European public outreach: exhibitions and science cafés engaging citizens in science
(CSA)
01-06-
EU: AT, BE, DE, ES, FR,
2016 UNIVERSITY togetherscience.
DITOs 3.5 M UK NL, PL, SI, UK
31-05- COLLEGE LONDON eu
AC: CH
2019
ASSOCIATION
01-07- EUROPÉENNE DES EU: AT, BE(2), CY, DE, FR,
cordis.europa.eu
2015 EXPOSITIONS HU, IT, LT, LU, , NL, PL,
SPARKS 3.5 M BE /project/id/6658
30-06- SCIENTIFIQUES PT, RO, SK, UK
25
2018 TECHNIQUES ET AC: CH
INDUSTRIELLES
01-05- BOTANIC GARDENS EU: AT, BE, BG, DE(3),
2016 CONSERVATION EL, ES(2), IT, NL(2), PL,
Big Picnic 3.4 M UK bigpicnic.net
30-04- INTERNATIONAL PT, UK(2)
2019 LBG AC: NO TC: UG
SwafS-01-2016 Participatory research and innovation via Science Shops (RIA)
01-09-
EU: BE(2), CY(2), DE(3),
SciShops.e 2017
3.0 M SYNYO GmbH AT ES(2), HU, IT, LT, NL, RO, scishops.eu
u 29-02-
SE, SI, UK
2020
01-04- FUNDACION
2017 PRIVADA INSTITUTO EU: ES, FR, HU, IT, NL inspiresproject.c
InSPIRES 3.0 M ES
31-03- DE SALUD GLOBAL AC: TN TC: BO om
2021 BARCELONA
SwafS-23-2017 Responsible Research and Innovation in support of sustainability and governance, taking
into account the international context (CSA)
01-04-
EU: AT, BG, DE(2), EL(2),
2018 FUNDACION
D-NOSES 3.2 M ES ES(2), IT, PT(3), UK dnoses.eu
31-03- IBERCIVIS
TC: CL
2021
SwafS-10-2017 Putting Open Science into action (RIA)
01-06-
UNIVERSIDAD EU: ES (3), PT, DE (3), BG
2018 greco-
GRECO 2.9 M POLITECNICA DE ES AC: CH TC: BR
31-05- project.eu/
MADRID
2021
SwafS-15-2018-2019 Exploring and supporting citizen science (RIA)
01-01- FUNDACION
CitieS- 2019 PRIVADA INSTITUTO
2.0 M ES EU: ES, IT, LT, NL, SI citieshealth.eu
Health 31-12- DE SALUD GLOBAL
2021 BARCELONA
01-01-
CONSERVATION
2019
MICS 1.9 M EDUCATION AND UK EU: HU, IT, NL, RO, UK mics.tools
31-12-
RESEARCH TRUST
2021
01-02-
EU: DE, ES(2), IT(2),
2019 KING'S COLLEGE
ACTION 2.0 M UK NL(2), UK actionproject.eu
31-01- LONDON
AC: NO(2)
2022
01-12-
EUROPEAN EU: AT, BE, EL(2), FR,
REINFORC 2019
2.0 M GRAVITATIONAL IT IT(2), UK(2) reinforceeu.eu
E 30-11-
OBSERVATORY TC: AR
2022
01-12-
TRANSPORT &
2019 tmleuven.be/en/
WeCount 2.0 M MOBILITY LEUVEN BE EU: BE(2), ES, IE, SI, UK
30-11- project/wecount
NV
2021
01-01- cordis.europa.eu
2020 UNIVERSITAT DE EU: AT(2), DE(2), ES, UK /project/id/8730
CoAct 2.0 M ES
31-12- BARCELONA TC: AR(2) 48
2022
01-01-
EU: BE, CZ, DE(2), EL, ES, cordis.europa.eu
2020 COVENTRY
CSI-COP 2.0 M UK FI, HU, NL /project/id/8731
30-06- UNIVERSITY
AC: IL 69
20222
01-04-
EnviroCitiz 2020 UNIVERSITETET I EU: CY, EE, ES, NL, RO,
2.3 M NO envirocitizen.eu
en 30-09- STAVANGER SE
2023
01-05- cordis.europa.eu
Crowd4SD 2020 UNIVERSITE DE EU: ES, FR, IT /project/id/8729
2.0 M CH
Gs 30-04- GENEVE AC: CH(2) 44
2023

98
7.3. Achievements

7.3.1. Citizen engagement: co-creation

CIMULACT’s main objective was to engage citizens and stakeholders in the co-
creation of research agendas based on real and validated societal visions, needs and
demands. CIMULACT built on the principle that the collective intelligence of society
gives Europe a competitive advantage and strengthens the relevance of the
European science and technology system.

CIMULACT established genuine dialogue between thousands of citizens,

stakeholders, scientists and policy makers visions and scenarios and produced
valuable suggestions for research and innovation policies and topics. In addition,
CIMULACT produced a guide presenting methods for conducting work with citizens
and stakeholders.

Finally, the report on comparison of research topics from CIMULACT with those from
expert-oriented foresight studies showed that there are marked differences between
the research agenda envisioned by citizens compared to those envisaged by experts
and policy makers, suggesting that there is room and need for both approaches to
complement each other.

The project’s outputs include a booklet documenting 23 citizens-based research

topics and compiled in a report including recommendations for research and
innovation policy.

These were delivered on time to feed into the last work programmes of the Horizon
2020 calls as well as discussions on Horizon Europe. They also proved to be of
interest to policy makers at a national level.

For SISCODE, ‘co-creation is a non-linear process that involves multiple actors and
stakeholders in the ideation, implementation and assessment of products, services,
policies and systems with the aim of improving their efficiency and effectiveness,
and the satisfaction of those who take part in the process’. SISCODE aims to
stimulate the use of co-creation methods in policy design.104

In the RRI research landscape report, SISCODE examined how co-creation has
manifested in EU-funded projects and policies. It found that many projects tend to
fall towards the consultation end of the spectrum rather than towards genuine co-
creation. Methods and objectives of co-creation need to be explicit, appropriate to
the subject, context and people, inclusive of all stakeholder groups and led by a
skilled moderator.

The SISCODE toolbox guides the project’s ten co-creation labs in their efforts to
figure out new solutions for societal challenges.

SCALINGS works to bring together diverse actors in a joint innovation activity for
mutual benefit. SCALINGS aims to identify under which conditions co-creation
practices can be scaled-up from one city or country to another. Businesses as well as
EU research rely on scaling up co-creation processes to wider markets. The project
illustrates this by way of an example: when engineers develop a healthcare robot
together with patients and doctors in a hospital in Barcelona, the robot might be
optimally suited for one hospital environment but it will unlikely fit to the social,
cultural, or organisational context of another hospital, city, or country. SCALINGS

104
SISCODE: Co-creation in RRI practices and STI policies

99
questions one-size-fits-all solutions to societal challenges and fosters innovation
practices that value the social, cultural and regulatory context. SCALINGS is testing
three key co-creation instruments: Living Labs105, Public Procurement of
Innovation106 and Co-Creation Facilities107.

EU-Citizen.Science is building a central platform for citizen science in Europe to

share useful resources about citizen science, including tools and guidelines, good
practices and training modules. Many citizen science projects develop mobile apps or
web platforms and only a minority are developed further in follow-on projects; the
EU-Citizen.Science Platform will serve as a repository for such citizen science
resources and will include lists of hardware and software tools and thereby ensure
the sustainability of projects and a common vision among the research community.
Furthermore, EU-Citizen.Science will provide criteria for ‘good’ citizen science.

RECIPES (REconciling sCience, Innovation and Precaution through the Engagement

of Stakeholders) aims to reconcile innovation and precaution by developing tools and
guidelines to ensure the precautionary principle is applied while still encouraging
innovation and to this end, seeks to introduce mechanisms for public involvement in
scientific and technological decision making. In May and June 2019, RECIPES hosted
citizen meetings in Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Italy and Bulgaria. Citizens
who took part in the meetings had the chance to reflect on issues related to
precaution and innovation in relation to research and to provide their ideas and
opinions on the matter.108
CS-Track aims to deepen knowledge on citizen science and its implications for
science and society, by investigating a diverse set of citizen science activities using
web-based analytics and multi-perspective analysis to understand the complex
processes that are at the heart of citizen science activities.

7.3.2. Doing citizen science

While the 2018-2020 work programme did not adopt an official definition of citizen
science, it did frame it as covering a range of different levels of participation: from
raising public knowledge about science, encouraging citizens to participate in the
scientific process by observing, gathering and processing data, right up to setting
scientific agendas and co-designing and implementing science-related policies.

In the 2014-2015 work programme, a number of public engagement projects were

pioneers in the field of citizen science and science cafés. BigPicnic focused on a key
priority for EU citizens, namely food security. An international network, mainly
consisting of botanical gardens, pooled their research expertise in food and food
plants, building, through the co-creation approach and public debate, a number of
low-cost, outreach exhibitions on food security, using the metaphor of a picnic
basket. The project, which has now ended, reached approximately 60,000 people
through Science Cafes, and its legacy includes a report documenting public

105
Living labs take the development of new technologies into the real world. They are sites of collective invention,
testing, and demonstration of technologies and sociotechnical futures.
106
In public procurement of innovation, the public sector uses its purchasing power to act as an early adopter of
innovative solutions. It acts as a co-creator by defining public challenges that could be solved through innovation,
choosing preferred solution providers, and steering the process towards public benefits.
107
Co-creation facilities are open, physical or virtual infrastructures for collaborative innovation. They provide lab space,
expertise, equipment for staff & external clients or they act as platforms for ‘triple helix’ interactions between academia,
companies and policy makers.
108
RECIPES event: European citizens on the Precautionary Principle and innovation

100
views and recommendations for RRI on food security, as well as a toolkit on how to
organise Science Cafes.

Under the same call in 2014, Doing it Together Science (DITOs) stands out for its
extensive and impressive outreach efforts (over 730 events, engaging over 550,000
people across Europe), and innovative activities. It was designed as a ‘leverage’
project, inviting partners to carry out citizen science and adding an element of Do-It-
Yourself (DIY) science. The escalator framework (Fig. 26: The citizen engagement
‘escalator) evolved through the project and became more grounded and clear,
positioning the DIY science and citizen science activities within a wider context of
public engagement in science and showing the potential for continuity and since the
project’s completion continues to be used.

Fig. 26: The citizen engagement ‘escalator’

© Muki Haklay

The escalator framework embraces the notion that there are different degrees of
engagement and that individuals can move up or down the escalator over their life-
course, and that there is no ‘optimum’ or ‘best’ level of participation for all people at
all times. Participation can be minimal, for example, volunteers sharing computing
resources or social media habits without actively engaging in the research itself, or
downloading an app that automatically collects data for scientific purposes, yet could
still be considered as citizen science.

DiTOs, and its Do-It-Together science bus, was itself an example of an innovative
and successful citizen science approach. Several ‘science captains’ drove the bus
across Europe, making a total of 17 stops at a variety of community centres, small
towns, public festivals and museums to run participatory workshops and report on
their journey on social media. The goal was to involve all kinds of local citizens in
ready-made activities and encourage participants to contribute with their own folk
remedies and recipes for sharing with new people in new places. This is an excellent
way to bring science to young children while at the same time brings citizens closer
to the EU.

The project has been mentioned in the Rand report, ‘Emerging developments of
Citizen Science’, as part as a wider strategy to increase citizen engagement in
science and policy making. It showed also how citizen science and crowdsourcing can
be incorporated into research and innovation within the European Union, in order to
help reduce asymmetries between citizens and researchers in their ability to interact

101
with and access science and the innovations that arise from scientific research.
According to the Rand report, Horizon 2020 has been instrumental in driving the
growth of citizen science within Europe through explicit and formal backing for the
approach by the European Commission.

Science shops are another example of a type of interface between researchers and
society, aiming to increase access to science, knowledge and technology for social
groups that would or could not ordinarily have had access to them. InSPIRES brings
together practitioners and experts to jointly pilot, implement and roll out innovative
models for science shops. Concentrating most of its efforts on Research & Innovation
in the health sector, with particular attention to ensuring gender balance and
inclusion of vulnerable groups (the elderly, adolescents, migrants and refugees),
InSPIRES organises science cafés and other public engagement initiatives following a
‘glocal’ approach. Under the cascade funding mechanism foreseen in the work
programme for this topic, InSPIRES organised grants that have supported a number
of activities, such as some in Africa (Uganda), engaging with local quadruple helix
stakeholders.

The sister project, SciShops.eu, aims to further build on the capacity of the science
shops ecosystem in Europe and beyond. The SciShops project seeks to demonstrate
the benefits of starting a science shop for every type of organisation as well as the
advantages civil society gain from collaborating with science shops in community-
based participatory research. The participatory events organised during the project
lifetime raise awareness of this win-win concept.

SPARKS was a public engagement project dedicated to creating and implementing

innovative ways to engage citizens in science, notably “technology shifts in health
and medicine”. SPARKS109 successfully organised an interactive touring exhibition
and 200 innovative participatory activities (science cafés, pop-up Science Shops,
incubation activities and scenario workshops) across Europe. SPARKS produced a
toolkit to prepare Science Espressos, Reverse Science Cafés, Pop-up Science Shops
and Scenario Workshops together with a handbook outlining practical guidelines on
how to implement the SPARKS methodology by means of concrete activities and
tools. These have provided useful input to the emerging concept of missions in
Horizon Europe.

D-NOSES, aims to launch a collaborative journey to tackle the problem of odours at

a global scale by developing coordinated local case studies in seven European and
three non-European countries, with the ultimate objective of placing odour pollution
on the global policy agenda. The International Odour Observatory platform,
currently under development, will become the one-stop-shop for all stakeholders
involved in participatory odour management activities in their own area using the
Odour Collect app.

GRECO aims to put open science into action in the photovoltaic (PV) sector. GRECO
will develop six cutting-edge photovoltaic products and involve citizens as amateur
scientists. Citizens will actively participate in the process of research, development
and innovation both in the design of new PV solutions and in the provision of data.
The material data generated by citizen scientists will be taken up in the research and
innovation process. In return, society will increase awareness and understanding and
help shape the direction of the spread of solar energy, thus leading to an overall
deeper understanding of photovoltaic research 110.

109
Horizon Magazine article '‘Hacker culture’ and citizen scientists taking research beyond the lab', 6 June 2017
110
Greco website

102
The 2018-2020 work programme was the first work programme that had a strategic
orientation and several topics dedicated to citizen science. A topic on exploring and
supporting citizen science in its broad sense gave space to applicants to come up
with new ways to tackle research and innovation challenges across all disciplines,
through ‘hands-on citizen science activities’. It made possible the use of the
cascading grant mechanism and encouraged the portfolio of projects to work
together with the ‘additional dissemination obligations’111. Interest in this topic has
grown significantly with the number of proposal submissions more than doubling to
69 in the 2019 call compared to the previous year. In 2020, the topic is repeated
with slightly amended text, and with the addition of a sub-topic focused on frugal
innovation to broaden even further the portfolio of actions in terms of disciplines and
sectors represented.

CitieS-Health aims to put citizens’ concerns at the heart of research agendas on

environmental epidemiology by tackling health issues that concern them. Groups of
citizens in five cities in Europe will design and run experiments to explore how
pollution in their living environment is affecting their health. To date, it has produced
an interactive step-by-step toolkit customised to different stakeholders and domains,
with a particular focus on air pollution, noise pollution and health factors.

MICS (Measuring Impact of Citizen Science) is developing knowledge on metrics and

instruments to evaluate citizen science impacts. The testing and validation of these
tools focus on river restoration as an aspect of nature-based solutions.

ACTION has set up an accelerator to support hands-on citizen science activities to

combat and prevent major forms of pollution in the EU. By considering the needs of
multiple stakeholders throughout the entire lifecycle of citizen science, ACTION
creates methodologies, tools and guidelines to democratise the scientific process,
allowing anyone to design and realise a citizen science project, from the early stages
of project ideation to validating and publishing the results and beyond. To further
pursue this aim the project published a call in August 2019 for new and ongoing
citizen science initiatives related to any form of pollution in Europe and worldwide,
and with a focus on the involvement of marginalised groups, using the cascading
grant mechanism. There was an overwhelming response to this call (116
submissions), out of which six successful applicants received EUR 20,000 to deliver a
six-month pilot with the support of the ACTION team. In February 2020, the
grantees worked together with the ACTION team on the tools already under
development, to co-design other resources aiming at supporting their activities and
enhancing their sustainability.

Citizen science’s strategy for social media: citizen science projects use co-creation
for all tools developed by the project. For example, each partner takes turns in
managing the project’s Twitter account. This coordinated effort led to the social
media accounts being highly successful, and as a result, at the end of DITOs, a new
citizen science project, EU-Citizen.Science, inherited the project’s social media
accounts.

111
The 2018-2020 work programme foresees additional dissemination obligations: consortia must make active efforts to
freely share, in a timely manner and as appropriate, the research strategies, methodologies, and raw and analysed data
deriving from their activities (including any evaluation activities), with the other projects funded by SwafS subject to
these same additional dissemination obligations. Applicants must acknowledge and incorporate these obligations in their
proposal, outlining the efforts they will make towards this in Annex 1 of the proposal. The respective option of Article
29.1 of the Model Grant Agreement applies.

103
A number of new projects, funded from the 2019 call, started in 2020:
 REINFORCE aims to minimise the gap between society and large research
infrastructures in the field of physics through the implementation of four cutting-
edge citizen science projects in the fields of gravitational waves, neutrino
astronomy, particle physics and cosmic ray interplay with geoscience and
archaeology with citizens. The project aims to involve 100,000 citizens in its
activities.
 WeCount aims to empower citizens to take a leading role in the production of
data, evidence and knowledge around transport and mobility in their local
communities and was the subject of a dedicated BBC news article.
 CoAct proposes a radically new approach called ‘Citizen Social Science’ to face
four social global issues (mental health care, youth employment, environmental
justice and gender equality), by engaging vulnerable citizens acting as in-the field
competent co-researchers.
 CSI-COP investigates GDPR compliance to analyse how far we are being tracked
by default as we visit websites and apps on our mobile devices. The findings
uncovered by citizen scientists will be used to produce a new taxonomy and an
online and open repository of trackers useful to a variety of end-users.
 EnviroCitizen aims to uncover the processes by which citizen scientists working in
voluntary environmental-based activities can strengthen their environmental
citizenship. The project will study birding activities as a means of developing
environmental citizenship.
 Crowd4SDG researches the extent to which citizen science can provide an
essential source of non-traditional data for tracking progress towards the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as well as the ability to generate social
innovations that enable such progress.

7.4. Recommendations

7.4.1. Policy recommendations

Scientific domains: Citizen science involves a wide range of actors from different
sectors (academy, NGOs, public authorities, museums, etc.). While citizen science is
applicable across all scientific disciplines, it will differ in terms of the research
approach, problem formulation and methods of data gathering depending on the
research questions, the disciplines, and the citizens involved.

Measuring citizen science: One of the main challenges for citizen science is to
measure the impact and devise indicators that are meaningful for stakeholders. The
MICS project, aiming to develop metrics and instruments to evaluate citizen science
impacts is a first step in this direction. Efforts to this end should continue in Horizon
Europe to emphasize its value in the research and innovation process and for citizen
science to be widely acknowledged as a research method producing excellent
scientific outcomes.

European platform for citizen science: EU-Citizen.Science will become the one-
stop-shop for citizen science resources, ensuring consistency across projects. To
complement this effort, an interactive step-by-step toolkit, customised to different
research contexts would be a highly useful resource to guide projects new to citizen
science. The EU-Citizen.Science platform and its resources should be referenced in
the respective work programme topic descriptions.
Inclusiveness: The Horizon 2020 interim evaluation pointed to the need for greater
outreach to civil society. In this respect, citizen science is an ideal mode of R&I to

104
democratise science, build trust in science, and leverage societal intelligence and
capabilities in R&I.
Ethical standards: The specific context, the research aims and the disciplinary
practices of a project will determine where the activities fall on the spectrum of
opportunistic to systematic data collection. In the medical and social sciences, the
boundaries of citizen science and data-collection practices can be challenging.
Sharing personal and medical data can be part of citizen science, but this depends
on the framing and intention of the project, and consideration of whether those
taking part are subjects of research or participants who are shaping and carrying out
different stages of the project. Some projects, such as SwafS’ Pro-Ethics, are
elaborating ethical guidelines for projects conducting citizen science activities. Such
guidelines should be linked with the European Commission’s on-going developments
in ethics and integrity in relation to research and innovation.
Environment focus: Many citizen science projects focus on environmental or
sustainable development issues, showing citizens’ strong concern about these
matters. This is an area of high interest for the European Commission, as shown by
the recently adopted Green Deal. Synergies will be explored with DG Environment
and other relevant DGs, so that citizen science is able to play a role in working
towards environmental objectives.

Policy dissemination: The European Parliament’s Green/European Free Alliance

(EFA) group conveyed their support for citizen science projects focusing on the
environment, such as DITOs, which organised several policy events with the support
of Members of European Parliament (MEPs). Efforts to raise the European
Parliament’s awareness about citizen science activities should be coordinated in
order to promote the value of DIY science and citizen science.

Terminology: Involving citizens in shaping technology and innovation is a key way

of bringing science and society closer together. However, the use of terminology for
activities involving stakeholders and the lack of a formal definition of citizen science
may lead to some misinterpretations in the research community and among the
public at large. It is important to distinguish between the concepts of public
engagement, co-creation, citizen science, open science and science communication
to clarify the purposes of each in the context of Horizon Europe. For example, the
term ‘public engagement’ has tended to be used in RRI when referring to
participatory activities. Furthermore, it would be useful to link these terms with
Responsible Research and Innovation.

Declaration on citizen science: DG R&I will organise a Citizen Science conference,

under the German Presidency, on 14-15 October 2020, ‘Knowledge for Change: A
decade of citizen science (2020-2030) in support of the Sustainable Development
Goals’. It will address this challenge by focusing on citizen science as a relevant
approach to contribute to global challenges and industrial competitiveness in Horizon
Europe. The aim is to gather policy makers and citizen science projects from all parts
of the world, from local to global scales, and both community-led and academic-led
activities, to build the future of citizen science policy making. Financed under the
SwafS work programme, this conference will be an opportunity to highlight the
diversity of citizen science projects from SwafS and beyond, serve as a forum for
reflection on the latest developments, and to define together the impacts, benefits
and challenges of citizen science. Most importantly, collaborative sessions will draw
recommendations to feed into strategic policy recommendations for the decade
2020-2030. One of the main outcomes will be a Declaration, formulated in an open
and participatory process, to chart the path for citizen science to play a full role in
helping achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.

105
7.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Reinforcing Citizen Science: Mainstreaming citizen science, building on the

investments made to date in Horizon 2020, is a natural way to reinforce citizen
science as a whole. However, while topic texts may be one avenue to approach this,
another is to mention citizen science explicitly in the proposal template and the
evaluation criterion of Excellence ‘Appropriate consideration of interdisciplinary
approaches and, where relevant, citizen science activities and the gender
dimension’.

Another way to mainstream citizen science could be to develop Massive Open Online
Courses (MOOC) on citizen science on the lines of that of University College London
and for projects to sign-up for such courses to guide them in the integration of
citizen science in their activities.

Furthermore, it is necessary to continue to fund dedicated citizen science actions to

pursue efforts in strengthening networks, co-ordinating as well as communication
among citizen science projects (particularly, but not limited, to those funded by
SwafS and SwafS-type activities in Horizon Europe and supporting newcomers to
citizen science activities notably as a result of mainstreaming citizen science in
Horizon Europe. This can be done through raising public awareness of citizen
science, and the delivery of training to citizen scientists (or potential science
practitioners).

Horizon Europe missions & citizen science: Missions, constituted under Horizon
Europe, provide a unique opportunity to test and refine mechanisms for consulting
and engaging with citizens. Use of citizens’ engagement for the definition and
implementation of missions under Horizon Europe is crucial. Effective citizen
engagement involves three stages of intervention: communication and awareness
raising; co-design and co-creation; and co-implementation. Awareness raising on the
missions concept is key for the other stages to be successfully deployed. Toolkits
highlighted in the achievements sections may be useful resources to develop these
missions.

Going local by making the most of cascading grants: Horizon 2020 introduced
cascading grants and these are particularly well suited to the ‘doing citizen science’
topic in order to identify citizen science actors at a more local level.

106
8. OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICATIONS AND DATA

8.1. Policy objectives

It is widely recognised that making research results more openly accessible

contributes to better science and innovation112. The European Commission has
strived to put the EU as a front-runner in open access globally.

Since 2006, the European Commission has been developing an overall EU policy on
open access, co-developed with the research and innovation communities, and has
progressively introduced specific open access requirements in the EU Framework
Programmes.

In 2012 in a Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific

information, revised in 2018, the European Commission encouraged all Member
States to put public-funded research results in the public sphere to ensure better
science and to strengthen the knowledge-based economy.

FP7 introduced requirements for beneficiaries in terms of open access. Under Horizon
2020, any peer-reviewed journal article published, stemming from a funded project,
must be openly accessible, free of charge (article 29.2. Model Grant Agreement).
The Commission wished to go further in terms of open access and encouraged
applicants to open up the underlying data.

The Open Research Data Pilot (ORD pilot) aims to maximise access to and re-use of
research data generated by Horizon 2020 projects and takes into account the need
to balance openness and protection of scientific information, commercialisation and
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), privacy concerns, security as well as data
management and preservation questions.

At the start of Horizon 2020, the ORD pilot covered only selected areas. Since the
2017 work programme, the Open Research Data pilot has been extended to cover all
thematic areas of Horizon 2020113, thus realising the Commission's ambition of ‘open
research data by default’ (but allowing for opt-outs).

Looking at SwafS in particular, the work programme topics addressed text and data
mining, innovative approaches to release and disseminate research results and
measure their impact, training on open access and re-use of research data.

8.2. Project portfolio

Open access was addressed in four topics over the course of Horizon 2020 work
programmes, resulting in 4 funded projects and their combined budget is
approximately EUR 7.4 million.

112
European Commission website for Open Science
113
Programme Guidelines on FAIR Data Management in Horizon 2020

107
 Fig. 27: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS)

Fig. 28: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

108
 Table 16: Open access to publications and data project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
GARRI-3-2014 Scientific Information in the Digital Age: Text and Data Mining (TDM) (CSA)

01-09-
2015 EU: EL, NL(3), PL,
FutureTDM 1.5 M SYNYO GmbH AT futuretdm.eu
31-08- UK(3)
2017
GARRI-4-2015 Innovative approach to release and disseminate research results and measure their impact
(CSA)
VIESOJI ISTAIGA
01-06-
VIESOSIOS EU: AT(2), DE(2),
2016 openuphub.eu/
OpenUP 2.0 M POLITIKOSIR LT EL, IT, NL
30-11-
VADYBOS AC: CH
2018
INSTITUTAS

SwafS-07-2016 Training on Open Science in the European Research Area (CSA)

01-05-
2017 UNIVERSIDADE DO EU: DE(2), DK,
FOSTER+ 0.9 M PT fosteropenscience.eu/
30-04- MINHO ES(2), NL(2), UK(3)
2019
SwafS-04-2018 Encouraging the re-use of research data generated by publicly funded research projects
(RIA)
01-10- EU: AT, BE, DE(2),
FAIR4Heal 2018 SERVICIO ANDALUZ ES(4), IT, NL, PT, fair4health.eu/
3.0 M ES
th 30-11- DE SALUD UK
2021 AC: CH(2), RS, TR

8.3. Achievements

‘The future of science is open’ is the philosophy underpinning the FOSTER+ project.
Its predecessor, the successful FP7 project, FOSTER, promoted the practical
implementation of open science, with activities targeting academic staff, young
scientists and policy makers.

Building on the original FOSTER portal and its training resources, FOSTER+ developed
more advanced, discipline-specific materials. In terms of its outreach, FOSTER+
organised 150 training events with over 5,000 attendees, more than 50 webinars
involving 2,000 participants and trained more than 250 Open Science trainers.

In terms of its legacy, FOSTER+ developed a multi-module Open Science Toolkit,

covering key topics such as responsible research and innovation, research data
management, software carpentry, text and data mining, reproducible research and
open peer review.

Open scholarship has revolutionised the way scholarly artefacts are evaluated and
published, while the introduction of new technologies and media in scientific workflows
has changed the “how and to whom” science is communicated, and how stakeholders
interact with the scientific community.

OpenUP addressed key challenges of the transforming scientific landscape and

provided innovative approaches to release and disseminate research results and
measure their impact.

109
The most outstanding results achieved is the creation of online tools for open peer
review and the toolbox of innovative dissemination tools for researchers114.

The exponential growth of data in the digital age has led to the development of powerful
techniques for effectively harnessing digital information and discovering new knowledge.
In this context, Text and Data Mining115 (TDM) enables researchers from different
disciplines to analyse, extract insights and knowledge, and exploit diverse and complex
datasets from various digital media. However, the present use of TDM in Europe is
significantly lower than in the US and Asia, most probably due to limitations imposed by
the European legal framework116 before the modernisation of the EU Copyright Directive
in 2018. In light of this, the FutureTDM project identified the barriers that inhibit the
uptake of TDM by researchers and innovative businesses. FutureTDM provides critical
up-to-date assessments of legal regulations and policies affecting TDM in the EU, and
places them in the international research and innovation context. This approach led to
developing novel policy frameworks and interdisciplinary case-driven practitioner
guidelines facilitating the spread of TDM activities. The Collaborative Knowledge Base
and Open Information Hub serves as reference for current and future TDM practitioners
ensuring broader TDM uptake to boost Europe’s research and innovation capacities.

The SwafS 2018 call focused on the need to ensure all data and metadata derived from
publicly funded research is FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable). The
Fair4Health project’s main objectives are in line with this challenge, aiming to facilitate
and encourage the European Union’s health research community to share and reuse
their datasets by demonstrating the potential impact that such a strategy will have on
health and social care research. Technical work is well under way on the setting up of
the FAIR4Health platform, which should be available in December 2021.

8.4. Recommendations

The recommendations presented below stem primarily from the small portfolio of open
access projects.

8.4.1. Policy recommendations

Researchers should be made aware of policy initiatives such as Open Innovation, Open
Science, and Open to the World, the European Open Science Cloud, OpenAIRE, the
FOSTER+ project, and the Open Access Button.

Research infrastructures and platforms for open access (high-speed data centres, data
repositories and virtual platforms) should be promoted.

8.4.2. Recommendations for Horizon Europe

Now that the Open Research Data Pilot has been running throughout Horizon 2020, it is
no longer pertinent to refer to it as a pilot. There has been some confusion on the part of
applicants between opting in or out of the pilot, which is not part of the evaluation, and
the management of data, which is part of the evaluation. Consequently, rather than
including this as a question in part A of the proposal, this aspect could be tackled directly
under the exploitation and dissemination section of the proposal template, with the
appropriate guidance for applicants and the corresponding evaluation sub-criterion
adapted accordingly. The evaluation sub-criterion could be phrased as: ‘Quality of

114
OpenUp website
115
‘Text and data mining’ means any automated analytical technique aimed at analysing text and data in digital form in order
to generate information which includes but is not limited to patterns, trends and correlations.
116
Christian Handke (2015) Is Europe Falling Behind in Data Mining? Copyright's Impact on Data Mining in Academic Research

110
proposed measures to exploit and disseminate project results including management of
data and IPR where relevant’.

The lessons learned from the open access projects implemented in SwafS point towards
continued efforts in terms of improving the knowledge and skills of researchers on open
access matters. The Open Science Policy Platform Working Group on Rewards
recommends a review of current training to include and embed open access principles.
The Science Careers (see chapter 4.3.3) presents the projects funded under the topic
introduced in 2019, targeting the improvement of researchers’ skills on open science
(encompassing open access), which should continue to be pursued under Horizon
Europe.

111
9. SCIENCE COMMUNICATION

9.1 Policy objectives

Science communication, as a discipline in itself, is conducted by scientists and other R&I

stakeholders, and is a career path followed by journalists. Science communication
informs citizens about science and innovation, opens up R&I to society and facilitates
citizens’ participation in activities and debate.

Two concurrent developments lead to the growing need to ensure the quality and
reliability of science communication: firstly, dwindling resources in science journalism
lead to reduced critical assessment and reporting of science; secondly, the rapid
diffusion of open access publications and science-related news through social media
increase opportunities for all citizens and civil society groups to reach large audiences
about science-related issues but sometimes without the editorial oversight and fact-
checking established in the traditional media117.

In 2016, the European Commission organised a Science Communication event. As

conveyed in this event, there are many definitions of science communication. In
essence, science communication entails presenting science related topics in a format
which is designed for and understandable by the intended audience and remains faithful
to the evidence.

Science communication can utilise many methods, and takes various forms including
school visits, competitions, science fairs, citizen science, games, online interactive,
creative arts etc. One of the main challenges science communication faces is the so-
called post-truth society with the traditional intermediary (journals) often absent,
granting non-experts the freedom to potentially mobilise support and engage followers
online.

The challenge for effective science communication is that while scientists are very good
at what they have been trained in i.e. science and research and producing research
papers (dissemination), on which their performance is assessed, science communication
is not part of their training or perceived as a priority.

In order to have the public on board for solutions to the challenges our society faces,
there is a need to build trust also through clear and effective communication. Scientists
should consider it their responsibility to make their work understandable by explaining
the underlying concepts in order to have a better informed and engaged public in the
world of science118.

Through the science communication topics running from 2018 to 2020, the European
Commission wishes to build a knowledge base in communicating science and improve
science communication across the EU’s Research and Innovation programme.

The SwafS work programme 2018-2020 took into account the results of the interim
evaluation of Horizon 2020 which pointed to a need for greater outreach to civil society.

117
SwafS work programme 2018-2020
118
Commissioner Moedas opening address for EU SciCom event, July 2016

112
9.2 Project portfolio

Science Communication as a topic first appeared in SwafS work programme 2018-2020.

To date, there are 6 funded projects (2020 call not included) with a combined budget of
approximately EUR 7.5 million.

Fig. 29: Number of coordinators in Member States (MS)

Fig. 30: Number of other partners in Member States (MS) and Associated Countries (AC)

113
 Table 17: Science Communication project portfolio

Budget Country Countries

Project Dates Coordinator Website
€ Coord. Other partners
SwafS-19-2018-2019-2020 Taking stock and re-examining the role of Science Communication (RIA)
01-12-
2018 UNIVERSITAT EU: ES(3), IT, PL(2),
CONCISE 1.2 M€ ES concise-h2020.eu
30-11- DE VALÈNCIA PT, SK
2020
01-01-
2019 EU: BE, DE, DK, IT,
RETHINK 1.2 M€ STICHTING VU NL rethinkscicomm.eu
31-12- UK
2021
01-02-
VENICE EU: EE, FR, IE,
2019
QUEST 1.2 M€ INTERNATIONAL IT IT(2), UK questproject.eu
31-01-
UNIVERSITY AC: NO
2021
01-01- LAPPEENRANNA
2020 N–LAHDEN
ParCos 1.4 M€ FI EU: BE(2), UK parcos-project.eu/
30-12- TEKNILLINEN
2022 YLIOPISTO
01-01-
ERASMUS
2020 EU: AT, DE, ES, IT, trescaproject.eu/
TRESCA 1.2 M€ UNIVERSITEIT NL
30-04- UK
ROTTERDAM
2022
01-01-
cordis.europa.eu/project/i
2020 SCIENCE FOR
NEWSERA 1.3 M€ ES EU: ES(2), IT(2), PT d/873125
30-12- CHANGE
2022

9.3 Achievements

The science communication projects commenced as recently as the end of 2018 and
hence most of the achievements are still to come. In this section we explore the
objectives of on-going projects and highlight some early achievements.

CONCISE aims to understand the role science communication plays on the origin of
beliefs, perceptions and knowledge concerning scientific issues. Through citizen
consultations in five Member States, the project will offer insights into EU citizens’
information sources and how these influence their beliefs, opinions, and perceptions on
four hot topics: vaccines, complementary and alternative medicine use, genetically
modified organisms and climate change.

The overall objective of RETHINK is to contribute to making the European science

communication ecosystem more open, inclusive, reflexive and adaptive. Its initial
Scoping Report on the Science Communication Ecosystem maps the diversity of actors
and the content they produce. The research conducted allows comparisons of the online
science communication landscapes in different European countries (Italy, the
Netherlands, the UK, Sweden, Poland, Serbia and Portugal) and has a broad focus
including the work of both professional and ‘alternative’ science communicators.

RETHINK will produce science communication indicators, guidelines targeted at

practitioners, scientists and policy makers to improve the quality of science
communication, a catalogue of good practices as well as training resources notably new
ways of training those who engage in science communication, including those
underserved by current training – such as bloggers and social media commentators.

QUEST aims to develop tools and guidelines for communicators and practitioners working
in the fields of journalism, social media, and museums to effectively communicate
science. In addition, it seeks to build an engaging science communication community.
Climate change, vaccines and Artificial Intelligence are used as case studies.

Quest commenced its activities by scanning the landscape of European science

communication in its Report on European Science Communication today. In addition,

114
QUEST mapped the training opportunities in science communication. It shows that most
European countries (115 courses in 18 European countries) offer science communication
courses and some, such as the UK, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Ireland, Spain and
Germany, where the first master’s degrees on the subject were initiated, are still those
with the greatest number of courses. As far as level is concerned, for the period of
analysis most programmes (75) are at the master’s level: only three universities, all of
them in Germany, offer bachelor degrees, and four (in Austria, Spain and UK) have
formal PhD programmes in science communication119.

In 2020, three additional projects commenced: TRESCA, ParCos and NEWSERA.

TRESCA focuses on developing trust in science and innovation. The project’s goals are to
systematically understand what drives public trust in science communication through
large scale, experimental survey research and qualitative, deliberative research. The
project focuses on three areas of concern around misinformation and digital safety;
environmental health; automation and the future of skills and work. TRESCA intends to
develop a set of tools including an animated science communication video which will be
tested in order to determine best practices for the creation of science communication
videos as well as a prototype of a misinformation widget working on encrypted
communication channels to help distinguish trustworthy content and sources. These tools
are intended for journalists and policy makers to learn how to best facilitate reliable and
trustworthy science communication.

ParCos will adopt a participatory approach to the creation of tools and methods to
support citizens to take part in conducting, communicating and discussing science. The
communication of stories alongside evidence will support citizens in judging the validity
of evidence and interpretations with the support of ParCos tools and methods.
Ultimately, ParCos aims to foster an environment where citizens demand evidence
making it more difficult for the voices of those making unsubstantiated claims to be
heard.

Citizen science projects sometimes involve the participation of various quadruple helix
stakeholders, which can pose a challenge in terms of science communication due to: 1)
the specific science communication tools and strategies to be used for each target group,
and 2) the required continuous feedback to each stakeholder group to maintain their
engagement throughout the project. NEWSERA will analyse and evaluate the complex
science communication strategies addressed to quadruple helix stakeholders in citizen
science projects across Europe. To this end, four pilot case studies will be selected from
ongoing Horizon 2020 projects mapped under the EU-Citizen.Science platform.
Innovative strategies will be co-designed for each stakeholder group.

To conclude on the achievements in science communication, a recent important

achievement from a project presented in the Research Ethics and Research Integrity
chapter (2.3.2) is of particular pertinence for science communication. The Path2Integrity
project, like many other SwafS projects took part in the EUvsVirus Hackathon organised
by the European Commission. This hackathon was an online event with the aim of
reaching out to innovators and civil society across Europe and beyond in order to
develop innovative solutions for coronavirus-related challenges. In total 2,160 innovative
solutions were submitted. The ‘Trust in Science’ project (based on Path2Integrity) won
3rd prize in the hackathon under the ‘social and political cohesion’ challenge. The project
is devoted to raising awareness of scientific facts and developing an online solution,
reaching audiences in their native languages, to combat ‘fake news’ notably in the
context of the coronavirus pandemic.

119
Quest deliverable: Science communication education and training across Europe

115
9.4 Recommendations

The recommendations presented in this section stem from feedback provided by

evaluators during the panel meetings which concluded the evaluation of the science
communication proposals.

9.4.1 Policy recommendations

Science communication should be framed in terms of being a one-way or two-way

process i.e. from scientists to citizens and/or vice-versa. It would be useful to identify
the targets for science communication, whether this is citizens in general or all quadruple
helix stakeholders.

9.4.2 Recommendations for Horizon Europe

A future topic on science communication should consider a comparative international

analysis to assess how Europe can learn from other countries in terms of augmenting
trust in science and scientists.

While the topics to date have been focused on increasing the knowledge base, to
complement this effort, a future science communication topic should focus on awareness
raising, synthesising findings and good practice, sharing tools, and networking efforts in
the spirit of a Coordination and Support Action. Follow-up actions to implement pilot
training on science communication could also be envisaged.

116
CONCLUDING REMARKS

Since 2014, the projects funded under ‘Science with and for Society’ contributed to its
primary aims set out in the EU Regulation establishing Horizon 2020, notably to
effectively build cooperation between science and society, recruit new talent for science
and pair scientific excellence with social awareness and responsibility.120

One of the key ways of working towards these three SwafS objectives, and ensuring
impact, is the implementation of institutional changes in beneficiaries. This is
demonstrated by the Key Performance Indicator for Swafs being ‘Percentage of research
organisations funded implementing actions to promote Responsible Research and
Innovation, and number of institutional change measures adopted as a result’.121

The results of a sample of twelve RRI projects revealed that almost 250 individual
institutional change actions are implemented or in the process of being implemented by
this part of the SwafS portfolio122.

The pioneers of institutional changes are Gender Equality projects dedicated to the
implementation of Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). Out of 168 institutions involved in GEP
projects, 130 institutions (78%) implemented or, are in the process of implementing a
GEP.

SwafS will well and truly surpass its target of 100 institutional changes in beneficiaries
by the end of Horizon 2020.

SwafS stakeholders are in an excellent position to take a leading role in supporting other
entities, for example universities envisaging institutional transformation. As
Commissioner Gabriel’s portfolio encompasses innovation, research, culture, education
and youth, exploiting synergies between research and innovation and education is
particularly pertinent.

Networking is key to ensure that projects learn from each other and build on existing
know-how. DG Research and Innovation and the REA organise thematic cluster events to
promote networking between projects and encourage sharing of best practices. Liaising
with other SwafS projects was formally encouraged in the 2018-2020 work programme
which foresees the inclusion of ‘additional dissemination obligations’ requiring consortia
to share their strategies and methodologies from the outset with a view to reaping the
full benefits of synergies. This grant condition was a key element in efforts to build a
knowledge and collaboration ecosystem. Project co-ordinators demonstrated strong
willingness to work together.

Science Communication is key for bridging the world of researchers and citizens.
Researchers need training in order to communicate their work to non-experts and the
fruits of the portfolio of projects working on this field will be of widespread interest
across the research and innovation community.

International cooperation is one of the priorities of Commissioner Gabriel. SwafS

projects have embraced international cooperation and involve partners from around the
world.

120
Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon 2020
121
Horizon 2020 indicators
122
This data collection exercise did not cover projects dedicated to gender equality, ethics, or open access/open data, which, to
various degrees, focus also on institutional changes.

117
Science Education is the basis for recruiting new talent for science. It is crucial to
continue to invest in science education to nourish young curious minds and invest in
Europe’s future researchers. The high submission rate of proposals throughout Horizon
2020 convey the research community’s strong interest in this domain.

Integration services offered by the pan-European network of EURAXESS support centres

for researchers’ careers and their families is an investment in the R&I system and a key
enabler of brain and knowledge circulation and should be considered part of the much-
needed transformations and scale-up mechanisms to ensure an inclusive, healthy and
attractive work environment for excellent research in the renewed ERA.

Gender Equality, enshrined as one of the key priorities of the ERA with a clear
commitment from the von der Leyen Commission reinforces the growing importance
attached to the Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). GEPs have been a pioneering tool towards
institutional change and with Horizon Europe, the aim is to achieve sustainable impact
and a multiplier effect.

Research Ethics and Research Integrity are fundamental to the credibility of

researchers work. Horizon 2020 achievements include establishing a research ethics and
research integrity community, developing frameworks and operating procedures as well
as training. Horizon Europe needs to build on this solid base to ensure ethics and
integrity are part of the research approach from the outset.

Open access to research outputs contributes to better science and innovation.

Continued efforts are needed in terms of improving the knowledge and skills of
researchers on open access matters.

Engaging citizens is a priority across the European Commission and a key component
of Horizon Europe. Missions, constituted under Horizon Europe, provide a unique
opportunity to test and refine mechanisms for consulting and engaging with citizens. Use
of citizens’ engagement for the definition and implementation of missions under Horizon
Europe is crucial. Effective citizen engagement involves three stages of intervention:
communication and awareness raising; co-design and co-creation; and co-
implementation.

Toolkits and guidelines produced by SwafS funded projects will be useful resources to
effectively implement these missions. In the near future, the EU-Citizen.Science platform
will serve as the reference point for tools and guidelines, promising practices and
training modules on citizen science. The COVID-19 pandemic, which came to the fore in
March 2020 with Member States going into lockdown, resulting in citizens across the EU
being obliged to stay at home, there was an imminent need for effective online tools.
Many SwafS projects adopted contingency measures including moving from physical to
virtual events and online activities.

Inclusiveness on all levels underpins SwafS. We need science education for all, gender
equality in our organisations, ethics and integrity embedded in research, communication
we can trust, open science and ultimately place citizens at the core to ensure excellent
Research and Innovation to tackle the challenges of today for a better future.

118
GLOSSARY

AI: Artificial Intelligence

AM: Additive manufacturing
CoP: Communities of Practice
CSA: Coordination and Support Action
CSO: Civil Society Organisation
DG: Directorate-General
DG CNECT: DG Communications Networks, Content and Technology
DG DEFIS: DG Defence Industry and Space
DG ENV: DG Environment
DG GROW: DG Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs
DG HOME: DG Migration and Home Affairs
DG JUST: DG Justice and Consumers
DG R&I: DG Research and Innovation
DG SANCO: DG Health and Food Safety
DIY: Do-It-Yourself
EC: European Commission
EcoC: European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
EDPS: European Data Protection Supervisor
EEA: European Economic Area
EFA: European Free Alliance
EIGE: European Institute for Gender Equality
ERA: European Research Area
ERDF: European Regional Development Fund
ESA: European Space Agency
ESF: European Social Fund
FAIR: Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable
FP: Framework Programme
GA: Grant Agreement
GDPR: General Data Protection Regulation
GE: Gender Equality
GEAR: Gender Equality in Academia and Research
GEP: Gender Equality Plan
H2020: Horizon 2020
HEI: Higher Education Institutes
HRS4R: Human Resources Strategy for Researchers
IA: Innovation Action

119
ICT: Information and Communication Technology
IPR: Intellectual Property Rights
IST: Information System Technology
KSP: Knowledge Sharing Platform
MEP: Members of European Parliament
MOOC: Massive Open Online Course
NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation
OR: Outermost Regions
ORD: Open Research Data pilot
OSPP: Open Science Policy Platform
PV: Photovoltaic
R&I: Research and Innovation
RE: Research Ethics
REA: Research Executive Agency
REC: Research Ethics Committee
RFO: Research Funding Organisation
RFPO: Research Funding and Performing Organisation
RI: Research Integrity
RIA: Research and Innovation Action
RIO: Research Integrity Office
RIS3: Research and innovation strategies for smart specialisation
RPO: Research Performing Organisation
RRI: Responsible Research and Innovation
S&S: Science and Society
SDG: Sustainable Development Goal
SiS: Science in Society
SoP: Standard Operating Procedures
SSH: Social Sciences and Humanities
STEAM: Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics
STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
SwafS: Science with and for Society
TDM: Text and Data Mining
TDS: Talent Development Suite
WP: Work Programme

120
LIST OF COUNTRY CODES

AL Albania IS Iceland
AR Argentina IT Italy
AT Austria JM Jamaica
AU Australia JP Japan
BA Bosnia and Herzegovina KE Kenya
BE Belgium KR Republic of Korea
BG Bulgaria LB Lebanon
BO Bolivia LI Liechtenstein
BR Brazil LT Lithuania
BY Belarus LU Luxembourg
CA Canada LV Latvia
CH Switzerland MA Morocco
CL Chile MD Republic of Moldova
CN China ME Montenegro
CO Colombia MK North Macedonia
CR Costa Rica MT Malta
CY Cyprus MX Mexico
CZ Czechia NL Netherlands
DE Germany NO Norway
DK Denmark PL Poland
EE Estonia PT Portugal
EL Greece RO Romania
ES Spain RS Serbia
FI Finland SE Sweden
FO Faroe Islands SI Slovenia
FR France SK Slovakia
GE Georgia TN Tunisia
GH Ghana TR Turkey
HR Croatia UA Ukraine
HU Hungary UG Uganda
IE Ireland UK United Kingdom
IL Israel US USA
IN India ZA South Africa

121
BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALLEA All European Academies, The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, revised
edition, Berlin, 2017

Christian Handke, Is Europe Falling Behind in Data Mining? Copyright's Impact on Data Mining in
Academic Research, 2015

Commission of the European Communities, Commission working document, science, society and
the citizen in Europe, SEC(2000) 1973, Brussels, 2000

Council of the European Union, Council conclusions on the transition towards an Open Science
system, Brussels, 2016

Council of the European Union, Council conclusions on Research integrity, Brussels, 2015

Council of the European Union, Council conclusions on advancing gender equality in the European
Research Area, Brussels, 2015

Directorate-General for Research & Innovation, She Figures 2018, Brussels, 2019

Directorate General for Research & Innovation, ERA progress report 2018: The European Research
Area: advancing together the Europe of research and innovation, Brussels, 2019

Directorate General for Research & Innovation, H2020 Programme Guidelines on FAIR Data
Management in Horizon 2020, Brussels, 2016

Directorate General for Research & Innovation, Open Innovation Open Science Open to the World,
Brussels, 2016

Directorate General for Research & Innovation, Horizon 2020 indicators. Assessing the results and
impact of Horizon, Brussels, 2015

Directorate-General for Research & Innovation, Responsible Research and Innovation: Europe's
ability to respond to societal challenges, Brussels, 2012

Directorate General for Research, Human resources and Mobility, The European Charter for
Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers, Brussels, 2005

Eneri, Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct, Austria, 2019

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, European Guidelines for Validating
Non-formal and Informal Learning, Luxembourg, 2009

European Institute for Gender Equality, Gender Equality in Academia and Research - GEAR tool

European Commission, Work programme 2018-2020 Science with and for Society, Brussels, 2020

European Commission, Work programme 2018-2020 Science with and for Society, Annex H of the
General Annexes to the work programme, Brussels, 2019

European Commission, H2020 Programme – Annotated Model Grant Agreement, June 2019

European Commission, SWD/2018/307 final, Impact Assessment Accompanying the document

Proposals for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon
Europe, Brussels, 2018

European Commission, Work programme 2016-2017 Science with and for Society, 2017

European Commission, In-depth Interim evaluation of Horizon 2020, Commission staff working
document, Brussels, 2017

122
European Commission, Work programme 2014-2015 Science with and for Society, 2015

European Commission, SWD/2012/221 final, Commission recommendation of 17.7.2012 on access

to and preservation of scientific information, Brussels, 2012

European Commission, Evaluation of the Sixth Framework Programmes for research and
technological development 2002-2006, Brussels, 2010

European Commission, FP6-SOCIETY - Science and society: specific programme "Structuring the
European Research Area" under the Sixth Framework Programme 2002-2006, Brussels, 2002

European Commission, Science and Society Action Plan, Brussels, 2002

European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe, European Convention on Human Rights,
Strasbourg, 2010

European Parliament, Council of the European Union, the European Commission, European pillar of
social rights, 2018

Expert Group Report, Evaluation of the Sixth Framework Programmes for research and
technological development, 2002-2006, Brussels, 2010

Expert Group Report, Providing researchers with the skills and competencies they need to practise
Open Science, Brussels, 2017

Gerber et al, Joint declaration on mainstreaming RRI across Horizon Europe, 23 May 2020

High-Level Expert Group on AI, Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence, Brussels,
2019

High-level expert group, Commitment and coherence Ex‐post‐evaluation of the 7th EU Framework
Programme (2007‐2013), Brussels, 2015

Italian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, Rome Declaration on Responsible
Research and Innovation in Europe, Rome, 2014

Leach et al, Emerging developments of Citizen Science, 2020

Mariana Mazzucato, Independent Expert Report: Governing Missions in the European Union,
Brussels, 2019

Mariana Mazzucato, Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union, Brussels,
2018

Official Journal of the European Union, Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions ‘A Union Of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025’, COM/2020/152 final, Brussels,
2020

Official journal of the European Union, Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions ‘the European green deal’, COM/2019/640 final, Brussels, 2019

Official Journal of the European Union, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of
the Council establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation,
laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, COM/2018/435 final, Brussels, 2018

Official Journal of the European Union, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Brussels, 2016

123
Official Journal of the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing
of personal data and on the free movement of such data, Brussels, 2016

Official journal of the European Union, Council Decision of 3 December 2013 establishing the
specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research
and Innovation (2014-2020), Brussels, 2013

Official Journal of the European Union, Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme
for Research and Innovation (2014-2020), Brussels, 2013

Official Journal of the European Union, Regulation (EU) No 1290/2013 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 11 December 2013 laying down the rules for participation and dissemination
in "Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020)”, Brussels
2013

Official Journal of the European Union, Communication from the Commission to the European
parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions, COM(2012) 392 final ‘a reinforced European research area partnership for excellence and
growth’, Brussels, 2012

Official Journal of the European Union, Council Resolution of 26 June 2001 on science and society
and on women in science, Brussels, 2001

Scientix.eu, Scientix is one of the world’s top 100 innovations!, 2017

South African San Institute, SAN Code of Research Ethics, South Africa, 2018

Trust, Global code of conduct for research in resource-poor settings, 2018

124
Getting in touch with the EU
IN PERSON
All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres.
You can find the address of the centre nearest you at: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en

ON THE PHONE OR BY EMAIL

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union.
You can contact this service:
– by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls),
– at the following standard number: +32 22999696, or
– by email via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en

Finding information about the EU

ONLINE
Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa website at: https://
europa.eu/european-union/index_en

EU PUBLICATIONS
You can download or order free and priced EU publications from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publications.
Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre
(see https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en)

EU LAW AND RELATED DOCUMENTS

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1952 in all the official language versions, go to EUR-
Lex at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

OPEN DATA FROM THE EU

The EU Open Data Portal (http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en) provides access to datasets from the EU. Data can be down-
loaded and reused for free, for both commercial and non-commercial purposes.
Inclusiveness on all levels underpins SwafS. We need science education for all,
gender equality in our organisations, ethics and integrity embedded in research,
communication we can trust, open science and ultimately place citizens at the core
to ensure excellent Research and Innovation to tackle the challenges of today for a
better future.

Europe can only thrive by matching the immense potential of science with the
values, needs, and aspirations of society.

Horizon Europe must strengthen efforts to tap into the vast potential citizens have
to offer and ensure effective cooperation between science and society.

Studies and reports