As such, Research Media Ltd will be providing coverage of the events in its flagship International Innovation publication, detailing the key issues, objectives and outcomes, as well as featuring interviews with prominent members of the ESF. Furthermore, complimentary copies of International Innovation will be available at the events.

International Innovation is a unique publication dedicated to the dissemination of the latest science, research and technology. It offers a bespoke service to researchers and leading scientific institutions who wish to highlight and share their latest work with those in the global research community, producing tailored articles and interviews to suit the needs of its clients.

Nick Brake, Director of Research Media Ltd, is enormously excited by the prospect of being an official media partner of all 2012 ESF events: “We are thrilled to announce our collaboration with the ESF at their upcoming events. The visibility that this will afford to the projects that we disseminate cannot be underestimated and we hope that our presence at the events will attract a wealth of new readers”.

The ESF is an independent, non-governmental organisation dedicated to pan-European scientific networking and collaboration and has played an essential role in mediating a multitude of heterogeneous research cultures and agencies. With a total budget of €61 million in 2010 and a projected economic impact in excess of €1 billion, it is a major driving force for advanced research in Europe.

To guarantee your FREE subscription to International Innovation and to ensure that you stay up to date with the latest ESF events, outcomes and interviews, please visit our dedicated subscriptions page at www.research-europe.com/subscribe.php.

Furthermore, for an overview of the ESF’s 2012 events, please see http://www.esf.org/activities/esf-conferences/2012-upcoming-events.html?year=2012.

The programme sessions will offer a forum to present and debate on the current state of gender equality within research and science organisations. Research Media Ltd Director Nick Brake expresses his delight to play a key role in the Summit: “Research Media Ltd is pleased to promote the first ever European Gender Summit by serving as official media partner. As one of the leading scientific dissemination services in Europe, we look forward to spreading awareness of the importance of including all individuals in the pursuit of more comprehensive research and innovation”.

Participants will have the opportunity to learn about the latest research on gender and innovation, learn how to implement solutions to gender-related issues within their work environment, and contribute their project to be included in a reference base to be showcased at the stakeholder exhibition. The discussions will culminate in a manifesto on policy development on gender for innovation called “Integrated Action on the Gender Dimension in Research.”

The European Gender Summit is supported by the European Commission through the Science and Society Programme (FP7). Key speakers include Director of the Joint Research Council and the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, Dr Elke Anklam, and Chief Editor of the peer-reviewed journal PLos, Dr Virginia Barbour

Commissioner for Research, Innovation & Science Máire Geoghegan-Quinn encourages the Summit’s dedication to gender equality saying: “Specific measures are needed to support women’s scientific careers, and to address gender factors in the research process, with a view to improving quality. The European Gender Summit will show how these issues can be tackled more effectively through collaboration between scientists, gender research scholars and policy makers”.

www.gender-summit.eu/

This event is vital in shaping the direction of future stem cell research and application, and Research Media Ltd is proud to confirm that it will be an official media partner for this year’s Summit, as Director Simon Jones asserts: “Research Media Ltd is absolutely delighted to be an official partner of the 7^th Annual Stem Cell Summit. We are dedicated to disseminating the latest science, research and technology, and the field of stem cell and regenerative medicine is certainly one of the most innovative and exciting fields in modern science”.

This year’s event will feature the release of the 2011 World Stem Cell Report, which will afford a global perspective of the greatest issues facing the stem cell community and the impact that they are having on how the field develops. With a full programme ranging from translational progress in different disease areas, to stem cell tourism and economic and commercial opportunities, this is an essential forum for all stakeholders in this discipline.

The Summit has attracted great interest and a number of prominent figures in stem cell research and regenerative medicine have already confirmed their participation. Amongst the keynote speakers for 2011 are Dr Alan Trounson of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Dr Gil Van Bokkelen, Chairman of the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine, and Dr Rudolf Jaenisch of the Whitehead Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

For further information of the 7^th Annual Stem Cell Summit, please see the official website: www.worldstemcellsummit.com

Research Media are pleased to announce that they will be an official partner for this year’s event, where we will be distributing free copies of International Innovation – our publication dedicated to the dissemination of the latest science, research and technology.

Simon Jones, Director of Research Media states: “We at Research Media are thrilled to be an official partner of the European Innovation Summit 2011. Research clusters consisting of industry, SMEs and academia are essential for research, development and innovation, and we hope that the event will serve to highlight the most pressing and pertinent issues”.

This year’s event will be held from the 10-13 October, and will be split into two distinct parts: a summit in Brussels, for which President Jerzy Buzek has granted the patronage of the European Parliament, and a Ministerial Conference in Warsaw.

Organised by Knowledge4Innovation (K4I), a non-profit, independent multi-stakeholder platform with members from the European public, private and academic sectors, the event will adhere to the motto ‘Towards a European Innovation Ecosystem’. In Warsaw, the summit will focus on both adapting EU research and innovation policies in national and regional contexts, and increasing synergy between different policy areas. Furthermore, the Brussels-based activities will enable participants to examine the role of individuals –  and young talent in particular – in fostering innovation and addressing the challenges presented by funding.

In the past two years the event has proved to be a lynchpin in debates on the function, pitfalls and importance of supporting innovations, attracting some 2,000 innovation stakeholders and over 200 speakers, including the presidents of the European Parliament and the European Commission.

This year’s event promises to be just as engaging, with the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek; European Commissioner for Innovation, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn; and the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, William Kennard, already confirmed as but a few of the high profile speakers at this year’s summit.

With hot debate surrounding future European policy and budgets for European innovation initiatives, this event affords a timely and open forum to discuss the most pertinent issues for all involved.

For further information, see the official website: www.knowledge4innovation.eu/EIS/SitePages/eis2011_home.aspx

Could you begin by giving an overview of your work as Secretary of State for Health?

With new legislation, we have already put into effect our big reform concerning hospitals, patients’ health and districts, which has reorganised our health service at local and national levels. There is still a lot left to do, and I want to make the best of the time I am in office by taking forward the following particular issues, which seem to me to take priority:

• To commit ourselves to the target of setting the politics of medical treatment on a totally new footing, so that there will be no new ‘mediator’ affairs. Our mission is to assure the health of the French, who legitimately want to feel protected and secured. To this end, we must give them back their confidence in the links of the chain of our Health Service, which must guarantee competence, independence and transparency

• To dedicate all our efforts to local medical care, after launching a vast programme of modernisation of the hospitals. In fact, we must organise medical intervention better, as a top priority, for the French must be able to access healthcare in whichever corner of our country they find themselves. To that end, we need doctors who are best trained to meet this challenge and whose working conditions should be facilitating and simplified

• To modernise our psychiatric care, favouring a take-up procedure which is more adapted to the reality of patients’ lives and to their wishes – to encourage them to stick to the treatments which they have been prescribed. In this area, I am convinced that we should develop alternative take-up procedures; for example by utilising mobile teams to go out and meet the patients, we could help hospitalisation to be avoided at all costs

• To continue the fight against AIDS and Hepatitis

• To continue the fight against all forms of addiction: drugs, alcohol, tobacco, compulsive gambling

• To hold back the general lowering of the rate of vaccination, which has been observed on most types of vaccine

• To get French people back on track, with a view to protecting themselves and others

As you can see, the targets are numerous!

What are your hopes for progress emerging from BioVision 2011?

First of all, I am very happy that Lyon was the chosen setting for the 7th edition of this global event! Such conferences represent a rare opportunity to be able to get together so many internationally famous delegates to debate the big scientific, economic and social issues of the sciences of life. To take part in such an event is an opportunity to build oneself up, to share experiences and to rebalance our priorities around humanistic values which, in my opinion, should guide political action. It is also an opportunity to make strategic contacts bilaterally, for example with delegates such as Professor Zhu Chen, Chinese Minister for Health, and José Ángel Córdova, Mexican Minister for Health.

My wish is that we all succeed with our respective responsibilities in exchanging only profitable ideas, which will actually take place; ideas for projects which will see the light of day and follow through into concrete realities.

You mentioned the welcome presence of Chinese Minister for Health, Zhu Chen, at BioVision – what do you hope France and China can bring to each other’s perspectives on healthcare? Are there areas in which China can help guide best practice in health and healthcare-orientated research? Do you hope there will be more collaboration between China and France in healthcare in future?

Professor Zhu Chen is showing a keen interest in the French Hospital system, with a view to reforming the Chinese Health Service, and particularly the reform of public hospitals, to improve their management, quality and performance. France hopes to cooperate with China within the framework of this reform. Looking to put an experiment in place between French and Chinese hospitals, 17 partnerships (two for Shanghai) with 16 provinces will be finalised before the summer.

Other projects are being developed. For example, cooperation in public health was enriched recently between, on the French side, the Institute of Prevention and Health Education (INPES) and the watchdog Institute for Health (InVS) and, on the Chinese side, the National Health Education Center.

A delegation from the School of Higher Studies in Public Health (EHESP) also arrived in Beijing to work on the reform of public hospitals in China. And in France, we will welcome a delegation from Guangxi Medical University within the framework of creating a French-Chinese Masters degree in public health. The aspects of organising a symposium for specialist doctors will be covered; as well as laying on a training programme for hospital managers for 2011, with the possibility of broadening this for up to 20 managers on targeted topics.

A further meeting between Professor Zhu Chen and I is set to take place in China, so that we can make a plan, at the halfway mark, regarding the state of current partnerships, as well as to discuss potential collaborations in the future.

You recently launched a campaign against regular excessive drinking in France. How much of a problem is this and what cost does it represent to the French healthcare system? Do you think that this type of preventative campaign is both effective and value for money?

The social cost of alcohol in France is particularly high. It is the second highest cause of avoidable deaths, with 37,000 dying every year, as well as the primary cause of deaths on the road. In half of the fatal accidents on the road, the driver involved is found to have over the legal limit of alcohol in his blood. A related pattern applies with tobacco, being one of the principal causes of chronic pathology (cancer, cardiovascular diseases, etc).

Additionally, alcohol is responsible for 1.3 million stays in hospital per year, and annually, nearly 130,000 people seek help in specialist centres to be taken on for a problem concerning alcohol abuse (harmful consumption or dependancy).

Finally, alcohol is responsible for 15-20 per cent of accidents at work; and road accidents account for the principal cause of death at work; and in 40 per cent of these of cases, the presence of alcohol in the blood is above 0.5g/l.

For all these reasons, it seems to us that the prevention of alcohol dependency constitutes an action for the benefit of public health which is particularly cost-effective.

In 2008 and 2009, you were the French representative for ‘Women without borders’. In your view, are women sufficiently represented at the highest levels of healthcare governance and decision-making? What measures are you taking to ensure that they are?

Women are not yet sufficiently represented in instances of decision-making roles, no doubt because they must systematically demonstrate that they are more competent and perform better, in order to aspire to equivalent responsibilities to those of men. That said, society is evolving, fortunately! Equality is progressively being established in instances where responsibility is exercised. Women can, from now on, take on responsibilities which in the past were difficult for them to access.

Within a public hospital, for example, women represent 88 per cent of the administrative career pathway, but only 38 per cent amongst them are on the Board of Directors. One can observe as well that the proportion of women at the head of a hospital is reduced according to how the size of the establishment increases. But, we are making progress; we reached equality in 2008 in the top ranks of social and medico-social establishments, ie. members of the Board of Directors (50.4 per cent women). The taking-on of female students seeking promotion will influence the take-up of senior posts for the future. The objective is to achieve a rate of 40 per cent of women in management. For this to happen, the State must continue to raise awareness, and also to engage in voluntary participation, leading by example.

Thinking about BioVision within the context of the French healthcare system reforms you wish to implement, what impact will the event have? As a town counsellor in Lyon-sur-Saone, and regional counsellor for the Rhone-Alpes region, what benefits – economic or otherwise – does the forum offer your department?

To stage an international event in France is obviously an opportunity for us and, as I was saying, I am particularly happy that this should happen in Lyon, in the Rhone-Alpes. It is an unusual opportunity to promote and show off our know-how and our experts, at a national level, but also to benefit from what other partner nations bring to the event.

The Rhone-Alpes region brings together experts in their field. On the subject of public health, I am thinking for example of the Mérieux Foundation, with the production of vaccines. On the subject of research into health, one can quote the highly secure P4 laboratory. And let us not forget organic technology!

The BioVision event brings together over 2,500 participants in Lyon. How important is face-to-face meeting between life scientists from across the international community? Could you give us some examples of ways in which past events have influenced the direction of your work, or how it might this year?

As a politician of integrity, I know it is vital to exchange views with experts from the workplace, for scientific progress on the subject of health. This allows us to keep in touch with the grassroots, to measure the advances and new challenges which are opening up, and to better discern delays and difficulties. It is important in our realisation of what is at stake, and finally, in decision-making processes. Obviously, it also allows us to be inspired by good practices abroad. To see what goes on elsewhere causes us to question ourselves, and I find this very healthy. In my opinion, there can be no pertinent political decision-making without getting together for discussion, or continuing to question our convictions.

This event confirms the necessity of bilateral and multilateral cooperation, so that the fruits of health research can benefit the greatest number of people, no matter the country.

Ensuring Europe’s health

Recent events such as the BSE crisis, coupled with epidemiological risks related to AIDS, SARS, and the massive burden of the ageing population, are testament to the fact that need for cooperation at European level in public health has never been more crucial.

Based on a number of policies and treaties, the EU has a legal basis to intervene in the field of public health, thus ensuring a high level of protection. The Lisbon Treaty outlined the need to set high standards of quality and safety of medicines and medical devices. Against this backdrop, a new field of action now exists for the EU, aimed at improving the complementarity of Member State health services in border regions.

The measures taken by the EU should aim to improve public health, prevent diseases, and identify sources of danger to human health.

To carry out these objectives and improve national health systems, the EU encourages cooperation and coordination between Member States in these areas, focusing its action on:

• The fight against major epidemics and major diseases

• The fight against drugs

• The establishment of an information system and higher education

• Border health

• Consumer protection

• The integration of health into other policies

www.sante.gouv.fr

To begin, could you give an overview of the Health Directorate and its mission?

My Directorate supports the research community in improving European and global health and the competitiveness of European health-related industries and businesses. Our work contributes to the achievement of the aims of a variety of EU policies, including the headline policies of Europe 2020 and the Innovation Union.

We fund excellent and innovative research through the multi-annual Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development. Within FP7, the Seventh Framework Programme (2007–2013), Health Research has a budget of 6.1 billion euros.

The projects we fund are transnational and collaborative, meaning that FP7 Health brings together excellent teams of innovative researchers from different European and associated countries, as well as other international partners working in universities, research centres, hospitals, SMEs and large industries and associations.

The complementary range of skillsets and areas of expertise bring benefits to participants that they might not otherwise have access to: for example, projects can feature partners with expertise not only in knowledge creation and research, but also in knowledge exploitation and innovation.

The selection of projects to fund is conducted by a system of peer review, described by independent observers as an example of best practice that could also act as a model for many national research funding organisations. Our latest set of selected proposals will be added to the 564 research projects which have been already selected for funding in FP7.

FP7 has also seen the establishment of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) joint undertaking, which will receive over its lifetime a cash contribution of 1 billion euros from FP7 Health and 1 billion euros in kind from EFPIA (the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations) member companies. Through IMI, the European Union and the pharmaceutical industry have joined forces in order to boost investment in European bio-pharmaceutical R&D and to overcome bottlenecks in the development of innovative medicines – both goals of increasing importance given the current climate.

An example of the work done by IMI includes the unique collaboration in the area of psychiatric drug development, the NEWMEDS project (Novel Methods leading to NeW MEdications in Depression and Schizophrenia). In this remarkable and unprecedented collaboration, NEWMEDS have pooled resources to bring together data of 23,401 anonymised patients from 67 trials on 11 compounds in over 25 countries to form the single largest database of clinical trial data ever amassed in psychiatric research.

We also contribute to a Member State-driven joint initiative aiming to tackle neurodegenerative diseases. This so-called ‘joint programming’ initiative recognises the impact of neurodegenerative diseases, in particular Alzheimer’s disease, on an ageing European society, and aims to aid Member States in joining forces to establish a strategic research agenda to tackle the scientific, clinical and increasing societal challenges of these diseases which are set for a dramatic increase in prevalence.

We are also a joint funder of the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), to accelerate the development of new clinical interventions to fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. In practice, that means stepping up cooperation and the networking of European national programmes; accelerating clinical trials of new products, in particular drugs and vaccines in developing countries; helping to develop and strengthen capacities in developing countries, including the promotion of technology transfer where appropriate; and encouraging the participation of the private sector and mobilising additional funds to fight these diseases, including funds from the private sector. The EDCTP will receive a total of 200 million euros from the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6), with another 200 million pledged by Member States. A possible second EDCTP is currently under discussion with the Member States whose decision to continue the programme is just the first step in the process.

You previously served as Vice President of Research at VGX Pharmaceuticals (currently Inovio) and VGX Animal Health. What has this experience brought to your role at the European Commission? How has working as an inventor on more than 100 patents and patent applications helped you to understand and confront the issues of health research?

With the arrival of our new Commissioner, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, the mandate of our Directorate General changed from what has been in the past ‘research’ to ‘research and innovation’. My experience in academia, in being one of the scientific founders of a small enterprise, being an inventor, and having taken new technologies from bench to commercial product has helped me better understand the needs of the scientific community and the process of innovation; consequently, I have been able to lead more efficiently and implement any necessary changes from both an organisational and thematic perspective.

What do you see as the main research priorities for the Health Directorate, and why?

This year, once again we have novel features in our work programme, including an emphasis on the participation of SMEs and on the funding of clinical trials. With the publication (19 July 2010) of our 2011 Work Programme (WP) and its corresponding calls for research proposals, we describe research topics which span the continuum from basic to translational research. Eight topics aim to support clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of various treatments and to promote the translation of research into clinical practice, each of which may result in several projects receiving up to 6 million euros. Successful projects will target results increasing therapeutic options for patients and will stimulate the implementation of best practice in Member States. Topics address issues as diverse as regenerative medicine, brain-related diseases, human development and ageing, antimicrobial drug resistance, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and obesity, and off-patent medicines for children.

To what extent is the Commission recognising the potential of small and medium-sized enterprises in the European research landscape?

When you consider that the U.S. public expenditure on health research is three times as great as that of the EU Member States and FP7 combined, SMEs are crucial for the innovation strategy of the EU. SMEs are the engines for innovation and growth. Thus, in line with the research and innovation approach, the work programme also features eight SME-targeted collaborative projects, requiring the strong involvement (usually a minimum of 30 per cent) of such enterprises. In addition, two ambitious ‘high impact’ research initiatives in immunisation and in epi-genomics with up to 30 million euros of EU funding, require that 15 per cent of the contribution will go to SMEs. They address the spectrum of research from knowledge generation to translational research and product development, as well as education and training.

Until now we have 735 SME participations in FP7 health research which have received a total of 246 million euros. The policy objective of FP7 health is to contribute approximately 900 million euros to SMEs. Therefore, the 2011 WP has a strong focus on SME-targeted topics; in 2012 and 2013, WPs are expected to reinforce support for innovative SMEs. A recent survey of all participants in FP6 and FP7 projects shows that about 800 SMEs have been created in the frame of EU-funded health research since 2002. Subsequent years will see investment continuing to be directed at SMEs, but also at the priorities of brain and ageing research in particular, thereby addressing the challenges posed by an ageing European population.

Given the global health challenges we face, the need for international cooperation has never been more pressing. By what means are you extending financial support to facilitate this?

114 countries already participate in ongoing FP7 health research projects. This is 30 per cent more than in FP6. In addition to the activities undertaken by the EDCTP project discussed earlier, the Health theme of FP7 promotes cooperation with international partners with the possibility of involving partners from any part of the world – in most cases with EU funding. For example, the recent coordinated FP7-Africa-2010 call for proposals addresses research aspects of the Africa-EU strategic partnership. A number of health research projects will be funded, each featuring a minimum of two partners from African countries.

The Health theme of FP7 is open to cooperation with partners from many non-European countries. Specifically targeted cooperation with other regions of the world includes the Mediterranean, Russia, and India and may in the future feature Brazil, China, Latin America and areas with clear European and global added value. In these targeted cases, FP7 funds are occasionally, but not necessarily, set aside to fund partners from these countries directly, but funding of European partners is conditional on their cooperating with non-European researchers, following agreement between the relevant funding agencies to publish similar calls for proposals in what is known as ‘programme-level’ cooperation.

How is the Health Directorate responding to EU policy needs? Are you involved with the support and follow-up of Community policies?

As evidenced in the answers above, the Health Directorate strongly supports innovation. A recent survey of all participants in FP6 and FP7 demonstrated that EU health research grants have a significant impact on innovation. Since 2002 more than 4,000 patent applications and 60,000 publications have been generated.

Just as all countries, everywhere in the world, are confronted with health challenges, all countries potentially stand to benefit when major breakthroughs are made. As one of the world leaders in health research, how are you ensuring that you are not only encouraging international cooperation to achieve such breakthroughs, but are connected to cutting-edge research around the world? By what means do you encourage this collaboration aside from research and financial incentives? Could you provide some examples of where this has been achieved?

This is certainly true and we are actively participating in several high-level gatherings which aim at coordinating research efforts to maximise the impact. I can mention for example the group of Heads of International Research Organisations (HIRO), where health research funding agencies from several key countries meet regularly and plan common action. Furthermore, we are involved in a number of disease or technology-specific working groups where joint activities are discussed. One of our tasks is to create new such groups in areas where a substantial level of funding is needed and international coordination is lacking. As examples of such ‘programme level cooperation’ I can mention the several activities in genomics, most recently in epigenetics, and the initiation of cooperation in population research on diabetes as well as on rare diseases. In addition to these multilateral programme level cooperations, we are also pursuing bilateral cooperation with individual countries such as the BRIC countries and Mexico, Egypt and Australia. In all those cases the participating countries contribute funding to their own researchers. I believe that this is the best model for such internationally co-funded common efforts, and that the administrative and legal framework should be kept as simple as possible. We have enough red tape and bureaucracy; consequently, the focus should be on the research and its outcomes.

Please note that the European Commission is not affiliated with this publication and the opinions expressed in this interview do not necessarily reflect its position or opinion.

http://ec.europa.eu/research/health/news-biography_en.html

To begin, could you explain your role as the Minister for Higher Education and Research? What do you see as the main aims and objectives of the Ministry?

As Minister for Higher Education and Research since 2007, I have led the reform of university autonomy, a reform that has been put off for 30 years but which was vital to arm our universities in the face of global competition. It is about allowing them to free up their initiative, to be more reactive in their recruitment, to have greater management flexibility, and to be able to manage their estate. This flexibility is combined with a substantial budgetary effort: a 22 per cent increase in university budgets since 2007. Unprecedented! Today, autonomy has been a success with 90 per cent of French universities gaining autonomy in the last three years.

In 2011, we are moving to the next level with the ‘investments for the future’ programme, with 22 billion euros dedicated to higher education and research. These investments are going to give French research a boost and allow us to emerge stronger from the crisis. The first successful candidates, selected by international panels, have been made public in the last few weeks.

Trends across Europe are showing that, with the economic crisis, graduates are finding it increasingly difficult to find employment, whilst across Europe there are more than 1 million vacant skilled positions due to a dearth of relevant expertise. In what way is the Ministry for Higher Education and Research responding to these challenges? Do you think there should be a shift in emphasis for higher education to reflect more the needs of employment, rather than those courses for which there is most student interest?

The law on autonomy has made employability one of the missions of university alongside education and research. Careers advice offices have been introduced in universities to support students. Furthermore, we have published the first survey of career outcomes for Masters students in France, showing their employment rates 30 months after obtaining their diploma: the results are very good with an overall employment rate of 91.4 per cent. Universities can be proud of these figures.

Will the LMD (Licence-Master-Doctorate) and the generalisation of ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) undertaken during the Bologna process help student mobility, and how in turn can this improve international relations and research opportunities?

Thanks to measures to aid mobility that we have put in place, student mobility is booming! We allow those students who wish to do so to go and study or undertake a work placement abroad for a semester, thanks in particular to a new grants system. Thanks to the rolling out of ECTS credits, time and study abroad is taken into account in France when the home university awards diplomas. French students have thus become European champions of mobility, with nearly 28,300 on the Erasmus scheme in 2010.

To what extent can higher education combat the social and economic challenges that France and Europe are facing? What measures is France taking to ensure those from less privileged backgrounds are not put off entering higher education?

My action is guided by a straightforward principle: equal opportunities at university. This comprises two steps: first, access to university, then success at university. I want university to be a driver of social improvement by merit. And so that no one is left by the wayside, I have reformed the system of social support for students. Since 2007 their living conditions have improved: grants increased by 13 per cent since 2007.

Could you explain the French system of research and innovation and how it is unique? Is there anything you believe other countries could learn from; conversely, is there anything you think could be further developed in the French system?

France is a great country of science; it ranks fifth in terms of research publications. Nevertheless we are behind in terms of innovation. We do not apply enough patents. In order to create the growth and employment of tomorrow, we set ourselves a very simple course of action: to remove all of the obstacles that were preventing innovation from spreading in our country. We will stay on course to achieve this thanks to the ‘investments for the future’ programme: indeed, 4.5 billion euros of this unprecedented effort will be devoted to promoting the results of our research. I am convinced that all our investment plans will allow us to accelerate the production and circulation of patents.

In terms of funding, what percentage does research receive from the government and how in turn do you filter this down to research institutions? What interplay is there in the French system between private finance and government funding?

The public research effort is substantial. However, private research remains insufficient. For this reason we have introduced a research tax credit. When you can tell companies from the outset that 60 per cent of their research-development partnership expenses will be tax deductible, it helps! Thanks to the research tax credit, we have signed some very good contracts; one in the area of software, with Microsoft and Inria; another in the area of health, with Sanofi-Aventis and the partners of the Alliance des sciences de la vie et de la santé (Life Science and Health Alliance). A third agreement has been signed between Renault-Nissan, NEC and the French Atomic Energy Commission on electric batteries, and there are many more. So private research is really taking off.

The French civil space programme is an important part of the Ministry. What would you define as its aims?

The French spatial adventure is primarily a European one. After the success of Ariane, France is working actively to take forward the geopositioning programme Galileo and the environmental monitoring programme GMES, which must be the expression of the European’s new role as a world space power.

Under the ‘Investments of the Future’ programme, the government has made specific contingencies for space. We have pledged 500 million euros, including 250 million for studies and an Ariane 6 demonstrator and 250 million for new satellite programmes, particularly international ones. Many satellite programmes are thus going to be put into service, with very tangible applications like altimetry, telecommunications and meteorology. And because space is also a scientific frontier, other more fundamental applications will be developed such as the observation of the universe and the study of the earth’s magnetic field.

What plans for the future do you have for higher education and research in France? Which areas do you think will be in need of specific attention in the coming years?

We have to work to strengthen the attractiveness and influence of French universities. Operation Campus, launched in 2007 by the President of France, aims to renovate French universities and design world-class campuses in the same league as the most famous universities in the world. Thanks to an unprecedented investment of 5 billion euros, we are going to be able to offer our students, our teaching and research professors and scientists the very best conditions that they so admire when they visit great universities all over the world today. In order to achieve this aim, we looked at highly ambitious projects from the world of higher education and research, not only in terms of buildings and architecture, but also encompassing teaching and sciences. After much deliberation, 12 world-class sites were selected by an international panel of judges. These sites will house our universities, schools, public research institutes and private research centres, each with a proper campus lifestyle where scientists and students are in constant contact with each other and can access university libraries and any other services they require, at any time.

What emphasis is placed on making the research you facilitate more effective and transparent to society, both in the economic and social dimension? Through what means does the Ministry conduct the dissemination of scientific research to the public, through accessible mediums and styles?

There are countries, particularly the U.S., which set aside a sum from project funding for the popularisation of science. It is true that we are not accustomed to this in France. However, we have some great events such as the science festival which are fantastic opportunities to educate about scientific progress. In order to develop this type of event, France is going to provide 50 million euros, again, under the ‘Investments for the Future’ programme, to encourage the spread of scientific culture. This is important, as certain aspects of progress are a source of fear. Finally, we have had a debate on, among other things, nanotechnologies which are the microprocessors that are found in iPhones, the microparticles that are put in cosmetic creams, and a nanovector which will make it possible to target a cancer treatment. We have to explain all of these practical applications of science. I would like researchers to have more of a voice in our country.

The future of French higher education

• In French higher education, 266,000 students are foreign nationals, or 11.9 per cent of the total, with nearly three-quarters at university

• 20 per cent of graduates will have completed part of their studies abroad in 2020

• As part of a progress plan – ‘Student Venture’ – launched just last year, all institutions of higher education will soon set up entrepreneurship training for students

• Starting this year, nearly 300 institutions, 71 universities have established platforms responsible for informing students about the provision of training and support, developing partnerships with community networks and increasing the dissemination policy entrepreneurship within their institution

• The establishment of 20 clusters of student entrepreneurship will bring together 227 sites and nearly 350 partners

• These clusters will launch awareness-raising, training and support involving universities, colleges, community networks and economic actors, aiming to reach nearly 380, 000 students over the next three years. This initiative will provide students with the opportunity to be trained on practical cases with the support of entrepreneurs in the working group through interdisciplinary collaborations between institutions in the same campus

• ‘Investment for the future’ will create additional opportunities to develop student entrepreneurship. The ‘National Fund Boot’ award, for example, is giving 400 million euros to mobilise support projects incubated in universities and schools

Innovating France

• The Ministry of Higher Education and Research has developed in recent years a series of measures to support the creation of innovative businesses, educating young people for entrepreneurship development

• The competitiveness of the French economy depends on the ability of companies to develop their R&D and innovation. To support industrial research and innovation in enterprises, the Ministry has created major business lines: service companies, technology transfer and regional action (Settar), and the research tax credit (CIR). This aids national businesses and European support for SME R&D

The final frontier

• The French civil space programme’s aim is to secure for France and Europe control technologies and space systems necessary to meet the challenges of research, security, economic development, land use and environment

• The European space industry has been highly structured in recent years; the specific activities of space agencies must be controlled by technical expertise, ensuring that the industry remains both competitive and technically competent

www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr

Professor André Syrota, discusses the work of Inserm, the internationally renowned public organisation, created in 1964, dedicated to supporting biological, medical, and healthcare research in France

Can you begin with a brief history of Inserm, its overall mission and its important function as the only organisation of this type in France?

For more than 40 years, Inserm has been the only public French organisation dedicated to biological, medical and healthcare research. Its multidisciplinary teams carry out research on most diseases, including the rarest. Both scientists and doctors, Inserm researchers perform translational research, moving constantly between the laboratory and the patient’s bedside. The results of fundamental research are studied in some 50 clinical investigation centres created in partnership with hospitals.

Since 2009, Inserm has been a founding member of Aviesan, the French National Alliance for Life Sciences and Healthcare, responsible for strategic analysis and national research programming in the biological and medical field. Aviesan members include: CNRS, CEA, INRA, INRIA, IRD, Institut Pasteur, CPU and the Conference of General Directors of Regional and University Hospital Centres.

Could you provide examples of some partnerships between Inserm and the French Ministry of Health, clinical groups and the biomedical industry?

For public health, Inserm has created strong ties with DHOS, the Directorate for Hospitalisation and Healthcare Organisation. Evidence of this partnership in France is seen in 54 DHOS/Inserm clinical investigation centres organised in specialised clusters based on pathology type. These centres are designed to bring together basic research and clinical settings, so that discoveries and the results obtained in the research units can be transferred as quickly as possible to clinical practice. Inserm also works in synergy with INVS (French National Health Watch Institute) in particular for approving registers that bring together all the cases of a specific pathology in a given area.

Inserm has recently moved closer to industry, following the example of an agreement signed between Aviesan and Sanofi -Aventis. With the strategic council on health industries, Inserm facilitates access to epidemiological data, especially for the pharmaceutical industry.

Through all of its partnerships, Inserm ensures that knowledge acquired in research units is transferred as quickly as possible into practice and to clinics. Conversely, the problems that clinicians encounter are sent for research in an effort to solve them.

How effective is the influence of your work on the public at large? Would you say that, as a society, we are becoming healthier?

Human health is a weighty topic of public opinion, a primary concern and a social issue. Research is subject to attacks from both sides: it holds hope as a basic contribution to improving health while simultaneously producing discomfort and dissatisfaction. In this context, communication plays a twin role. It is both a means to legitimise research and a response to the transparency demanded by society.

Inserm has a good reputation in France. However, despite being renowned for dialogue and efficiency, we must communicate even more closely with society. To respond to the second half of your question, it is true that today the harmful effects of certain habits are recognised and addressed, thanks in part to the work of our researchers. The spread of information and prevention must also be the basis for social reflection and contribute to changes in habits.

Inserm’s mission is to support young scientists. How does this supportive approach work in practice? Have you noticed an increase in the number of those embarking on careers in medical research thanks, notably, to Inserm’s Lilian Bettencourt School?

Inserm wants to increase its attractiveness for young researchers. Various measures have been taken to facilitate this, such as the creation of ATIP/ Avenir teams with the CNRS, hiring experienced young researchers on three- to five-year contracts, and opening reception centres (two-year contracts for young interns, assistant clinic heads, university hospital assistants, doctors, pharmacists, dentists and veterinarians). Due to Inserm’s efforts, France is well-positioned to accept projects from young researchers, but is always looking to improve. Inserm’s Liliane Bettencourt School is another way of supporting young researchers. It provides an early theoretical and practical foundation for biological and medical research, intended for a limited number of students beginning with their second year in medical and pharmacy studies. The goal of the programme is to increase Inserm’s visibility to future doctors and pharmacists, in order to encourage them to integrate research in their career plans and ultimately become medical researchers.

To what measure are Inserm’s researchers involved in healthcare decision-making policy and what are the key factors influencing the transfer of treatments ‘from the lab to the hospital bed’?

The Ministry of Health is one of Inserm’s two supervisory ministries. In this capacity, it poses questions to Inserm, and Inserm in turn responds in the form of collective assessments. Bringing together international scientific and medical knowledge, these assessments shed the scientific light necessary for making decisions concerning healthcare, screening and prevention. They also contribute to identifying requirements in public health for basic, clinical and therapeutic research. These assessments follow a well-defined procedure and merit the label ‘collective Inserm assessment’. Through the media, politicians and society at large become aware of this work (psychiatric therapies, genetic testing, etc.). Government officials also turn to Inserm for information on biomedical research and its consequences for public health.

Regarding Inserm Transfert, would it be correct to say that Inserm is committed to a holistic viewpoint in medical research, by seeking to benefit patients, industry and the economy in the same manner?

Yes, it is correct. This is one of Inserm missions that is fully delegated to Inserm Transfert, our wholly-owned private subsidiary. Inserm Transfert promotes knowledge transfer from Inserm labs to health industries. It seeks to strengthen strategic partnerships between biomedical research and biopharmaceutical companies, to support translational research and to create sustainable spin-offs in the biotechnology arena. So as a long-term goal, Inserm and Inserm Transfert generate innovations that contribute to the welfare of populations and to the growth of economies. And in our knowledge-based societies, technology transfer is a major value creation player, acting as a true partner of research labs, hospitals and health industries.

Inserm is one of the nine founding members of Aviesan, the French National Alliance for Life Sciences and Healthcare, created in 2009 and directed by a coordinating council on life sciences and healthcare. How was the first year of setting up this national partnership, and what are your hopes for progress for the 10 specialised multi-organisation institutes that it includes?

The goal of Aviesan is to improve the response to new issues in life sciences and healthcare. It includes the various French research institutions: Inserm, CNRS, Institut Pasteur, Inra, CEA, IRD as well as the Conference of University Presidents and the Conference of General Directors of Regional and University Hospital Centres. The process is primarily scientific, by acquiring the ability to carry out an overall strategic analysis, rather than by institution, within the major fields of specialisation (neurosciences, microbiology and infectious diseases, health technologies, etc). This is the role of the 10 specialised multiorganisation institutes, which bring together scientific experts who are responsible for reviewing the current situation, carrying out strategic analysis and offering wide perspectives. Considerable work has been done over the past year and for the first time we share a strategic vision that spans major scientific fields and is independent of institutional affiliation.

Who can request funding from Inserm, and what are your funding priorities? Have you been able to simplify the procedure for funding, and what are the results?

One of Inserm’s main missions is to provide financial support to the best French laboratories in biological, medical and healthcare research. To do this, we use the classification of AERES, the Agency for the Evaluation of Research and Higher Education. This classification includes laboratories – Inserm’s own, as well as university and hospital laboratories, etc. that have sought funding. Using this information, Inserm then chooses the best projects to support. In 95 per cent of cases, this means co sponsorship with a university. In addition to the financial support to cover project costs, Inserm also ensures institutional financing, reassessed every four years, for the laboratory’s regular operation.

In the field of biomedical research, how does France compare with its European neighbours? Are there particular fields where you are the leader?

France has the scientific skills to respond to all current challenges in the life sciences and healthcare. Bibliometric analyses demonstrate that the laboratories recognised by the national research organisations (in particular, Inserm, CNRS, Inra and CEA) or institutions like the Institut Pasteur have a level of scientific production that is comparable, and even superior, to similar institutions in other major scientific nations. French research in the life sciences and healthcare can retain its position, and even aspire to be a leader in certain fields, if it keeps continually, and collectively, abreast of the latest issues and adapts accordingly.

How would you describe your success as an institution? Does Inserm have a strategic vision for the next decade?

The quality of Inserm’s research and the value of its teams are renowned: their international position makes them key players in world research in the life sciences and healthcare. Our work is to tackle the scientific, social and economic issues that are part of the field. Inserm has accordingly set objectives for the next decade, which are as follows: promote creativity and excellence, take social responsibility, contribute to strengthening research and university training, rapidly expand translational and clinical research, form strategic partnerships with industry, play a key role in building the European research space and, finally, ensure consistency and action as part of the French National Alliance for Life Sciences and Healthcare.

http://english.inserm.fr/

In your view, what are the biggest challenges facing European education today? How can the European Commission help to address the challenges the economic downturn poses on education?

The EU relies on people’s talents and knowledge. Lifelong learning is an indispensable precondition for economic competitiveness in a globalised economy that is based on knowledge. Europe’s citizens need to be equipped with the right skills and competences for the jobs of today and tomorrow. And they also need higher skill levels than in the past: by 2020, 16 million more jobs will require advanced qualifications and the demand for low skills will drop by 12 million jobs.

These challenges have been put at the centre of joint European efforts to emerge from the crisis. Two flagship initiatives have been launched to help Member States to achieve these objectives: ‘Youth on the Move’ aims at improving the quality of initial education and training, supporting young people’s progress to higher skill levels and enhancing opportunities for learning and working mobility in Europe. This is complemented by the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs, an initiative to modernise labour markets and to help people acquire the right skills and competences throughout their lifetime.

Could you tell us more about the Youth on the Move initiative? What do you hope the scheme will achieve in terms of enhancing skills, employability and cultural diversity?

Youth on the Move is a flagship initiative launched by the European Commission to help the EU achieve the goals of its Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. As part of this comprehensive 10 year strategy, EU leaders have agreed to work together to boost employment and increase skill levels. A key target is to substantially reduce early school-leaving (from 14.4 per cent to less than 10 per cent across Europe), and to increase the share of young people graduating from higher education to at least 40 per cent on average.

Youth on the Move aims to contribute to these objectives through actions to improve the quality of education and training at all levels – including higher education – by providing more opportunities for young people to study or train abroad, and by improving support for those looking for their first job. I believe learning mobility can make a real contribution to skills development, especially as it allows young people to develop intercultural and communication competences, which are highly valued by employers.

What is the Youth In Action scheme and how does this support your work for young people? How important do you consider the need to engage young people in democratic processes at national, European and international levels? In your view, is enough being done to encourage tolerance and positive citizenry among youth?

Encouraging youth participation has been at the core of EU youth policy since its inception. The Lisbon Treaty explicitly encourages the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe. The Commission supports youth participation, particularly by organising a structured dialogue between youth and policy makers. The EU Youth Portal encourages the online participation of young people. The next group of EU Presidencies (Poland, Denmark and Cyprus) share the Commission’s commitment and have made youth participation a priority for the coming years.

The Youth in Action programme is the main EU funding scheme supporting non-formal education. It is a programme for all young people, but with a focus on disadvantaged groups. The main priorities of the programme are European citizenship, young people’s participation in democratic processes, cultural diversity and solidarity. Young people aged 15-28 can participate in a range of activities such as youth exchanges, youth initiatives and youth democracy projects. They can also volunteer abroad with the European Voluntary Service.

The programme also supports NGOs working with young people. Every year more than 130,000 young people receive EU support through the Youth in Action programme. It helps to reach the EU’s educational goals and contributes to the Europe 2020 reform strategy by building up skills likely to foster young peoples’ employability.

There has been much controversy and unrest in the UK recently about the proposed shake-up of (and increases to) university tuition fees. What is your stance on the accessibility of higher education to those from less privileged backgrounds? In your view, does higher education still represent good value for money, for both students entering it (and often incurring debts) and those countries subsidising students and institutions?

Both public and private funding can contribute to enabling higher education to meet Europe’s aspirations. Tuition fees, particularly when they are set at high levels, need to be backed up by robust systems of grants and/or affordable loans if we want to ensure that students, especially those from financially disadvantaged backgrounds, are not put off going to university, or forced to drop out because of financial pressures.

Higher education is an excellent investment for both the individual and for governments. A recent assessment by the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies at the University of Twente in the Netherlands looked at rates of return on investment in higher education studies. It found that higher education graduates earn 10 per cent more on average than non-graduates, and that the state benefits too, with graduates contributing 8 per cent more on average to the public purse through taxes and contributions to GDP.

Your website gives specific mention to the Marie Curie Actions programme supporting the mobility of researchers. How important do you view this scheme and the mobility of researchers generally? What other steps is the Commission taking to encourage the flow of the best researchers into and from Europe?

The Marie Curie Actions have an important role to play in the Europe 2020 strategy and the European Research Area by focusing on cross-national mobility and on enhancing the skills and career development of researchers. The EU has already provided grants to 50,000 researchers through this scheme. Marie Curie Actions offer attractive employment conditions in research, which are internationally competitive and in line with the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for their Recruitment. This is vital in order to keep researchers in Europe, attract the best from abroad, and encourage more people to undertake a research career. The EU’s support also contributes to an increased supply of highly qualified workers in Europe. It is estimated that the EU will need at least 1 million new research jobs if it is to reach its target of spending 3 per cent of GDP on R&D.

What role do you believe multilingualism has in enhancing your other areas of responsibility? In your view, if more professionals were multilingual, would mobility (for scientists/researchers and other workers) be greatly enhanced? Do you believe languages should be compulsory across European educational systems?

Yes, definitely. Linguistic diversity is part of the blueprint for the EU. Our motto is ‘unity in diversity’. According to the ‘2+1 principle’ agreed by EU leaders at the Barcelona summit in March 2002, every child should be taught at least two foreign languages in addition to his/her mother tongue from a very young age. It is up to the Member States to make sure that the teaching of languages is part of the curricula in schools and universities.

European businesses with international operations are increasingly aware of the necessity to use different languages. The ability to speak foreign languages is among the eight key competences defined and promoted by the Commission and the Member States with the aim of making future generations fit for the labour market. In a recent Eurobarometer study on the employability of graduates (November 2010), foreign languages were among the most required skills that recruiters will be looking for in the future. Researchers use English as a lingua franca to a high extent. But it is often people with the knowledge of other foreign languages than English that make full use of the opportunities on the European single market and benefit from learning mobility.

http://ec.europa.eu/education/

To what extent is international cooperation impacting economic development through strategic partnerships with Third Countries?

As I mentioned before [see last issue of International Innovation], the aim of such cooperation is to leverage resources and so reach more ambitious goals. This of course has economic impacts on two levels: on the one hand in the sense of using resources more efficiently, which can be invested in faster and more ambitious development; and on the other hand, in multiplying the outcomes of research efforts. European cooperation delivers more than the sum of its parts, and this is also the case with international health research. In addition to the economic benefits for companies which participate in the research and develop new technologies and treatments – possibly also enhancing their access to markets – the benefits are also felt on the side of the patients who should get better treatments, and more broadly, in the sense of science diplomacy, supporting the good relations between countries.

Clinical trials are an important aspect of health research. They provide clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry with the opportunity to evaluate the safety and efficacy of new treatments. In addition, such trials can be used to study the health of populations and assess how effectively health services are organised. Conversely, there are concerns that regulations have made clinical research too complicated and expensive to carry out. How are you ensuring best practice in ethics and safety, when involving humans in studies? How does the DG for Research & Innovation ensure a balance between these two factors (safety and efficiency)?

It is true that with increasing advances in medical and other technologies, clinical trials that are aimed at obtaining Marketing Authorisations for new health interventions have become increasingly complex and costly to carry out. Quality, Safety, Efficacy and Ethical hurdles for new medicines exist for the protection of the public, since European citizens are entitled to the highest standards of healthcare. Consequently, for the various types of clinical trials that are funded by the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), scientific and regulatory advice should be sought from the regulatory bodies, in particular from the European Medicines Agency (EMA), before launching a research programme.

Measures have been put in place to facilitate this, especially for SMEs who can benefit from a whole range of such services and at the same time benefit from substantial discounts for facilities such as: administrative and procedural assistance from the SME Office at the Agency; fee reductions for scientific advice (90 per cent) and inspections; fee exemptions for certain administrative services (excluding parallel distribution); deferral of the fee payable for an application for marketing authorisation or related inspection; conditional fee exemption where scientific advice is followed and a marketing authorisation application is not successful; and assistance with translations of the product information documents submitted in the application for marketing authorisation.

The EMA has established an office to deal with the submission of requests for designation of SME status and to answer further queries. A comprehensive guide has been published giving further information. In this way, medicinal products that have been tested in clinical trials can get to market in the shortest possible time, while at the same time being of the highest clinical quality.

In addition, all projects funded via our programmes are subject to a multilevel scientific and ethical review. The peer-review process organised by the Commission is based on a number of principles, including speed and efficiency and consideration of ethical aspects. Firstly, all clinical trials funded through FP7 are subject to a serious scientific review by high level independent experts. Only projects that represent an acceptable benefit/risk-ratio will be selected for funding. Projects are also subject to a separate ethics review.

Further to the above, most medicines used to treat the children of Europe have not been specifically tested for use on them. How is this difficult and important issue being addressed by the Commission and DG Research? What safety measures are taken, in the absence of testing like that performed on adult drugs?

Most medicines used to treat children have never been tested on them and that licensing has been based upon an extrapolation of adult data to these age groups. Nevertheless, children are not small adults and the Paediatric Medicines Regulation now requires that all new Marketing Authorisations for any new medicine has a specific Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP), which is a clinical development programme for that new medicine in children. Older off-patent medicines that have been on the market for some years need new child-friendly formulations, and a list of specific needs (Priority List of Paediatric Medicines) is produced regularly by the EMA. As part of FP7, DG Research and Innovation offers funding, based on this priority list, to research groups carrying out clinical trials in children. These should be done with a view to obtaining a new type of marketing instrument, a Paediatric Use Marketing Authorisation (PUMA), which guarantees data protection for that specific formulation and indication in children for a 10-year period. SMEs are particularly encouraged to participate in this process. Nevertheless, this is only a very small aspect of our paediatric research that addresses many issues, from rare diseases to vaccines.

Personalised medicine aims at providing the right treatment to the right patient, at the right dose and at the right time. Rather than having a unique treatment for each individual, patients can be sub-divided into groups based on their individual biological characteristics (genetic and genomic). How is this aiding the development and research of medical interventions? Does this present any difficult questions in terms of ‘pre-diagnosing’ patients based on their profile?

In many instances, having a unique treatment can be the best option for a given problem. This would be the case, for example, by the routine appendicectomy or preoperative antisepsis.

Nevertheless, subdividing patients into groups based on their individual biological characteristics can be the ultimate determinant of success or failure with numerous health interventions that today are taken for granted. These characteristics play a role in obtaining an optimum response to therapy or reduction of adverse events, and this is very much at the forefront in the development and research of new medical and other interventions. The most important question – or challenge – to be recognised in the future is that the characterisation of patient biological profiles on this basis will become part and parcel of the diagnostic and therapeutic work-up of patients; indeed, to an extent, equal to that of the diagnosis and treatment of disease.

What does the next five years hold for the Health Directorate – do you have plans to branch into different areas, and if so, what are they?

We will continue to focus on FP7, both in the launching of new calls for proposals and in the management of ongoing projects (and of course in the management of those which remain from FP6), as well as on building on the success of the Innovative Medicines Initiative. We are continuing to work on determining how health research should be managed in the next framework programme. For me it is clear that we need to continue to do what we do well – setting priorities and executing proposal evaluation and project management – while continuing to focus on reducing the administrative burden for our clients. Innovation is our policy priority and we will endeavour to find ways to ensure that we can support the innovative process in health research, right the way from basic research through to delivery of products onto the market.

Please note that the European Commission is not affiliated with this publication and that the opinions expressed in this interview do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission.

http://ec.europa.eu/research/health