How to address the challenges related to the ERIC Regulation and its implementation

Since the establishment of the Regulation on a Community legal framework for European Research Infrastructure Consortiums (ERICs) in 2009, the ERIC regulation has served as a cornerstone for the setup of research infrastructures across Europe. The ERIC concept has played a pivotal role in implementing the European Research Area (ERA), providing a clear legal framework for governance, operations, and scientific endeavors. Over the years, the ERIC regulation has enabled collaboration among Member States, reduced duplication of efforts, and enhanced coordination in research and innovation.
 
However, despite its significance, the implementation of the ERIC regulation has encountered challenges. From governance and financial sustainability to varying national laws and VAT exemptions, ERICs have navigated through complex landscapes, each presenting its own set of hurdles.
 
The Second Implementation Project for the ERIC Forum (ERIC Forum 2) has addressed these challenges by establishing an internal team (Work Package 12 or WP 12) tasked with creating a list of recommendations on how to address the challenges related to the ERIC Regulation and its implementation. A preliminary document was released this spring and will be used in the following months also by the European Commission as they are working on revising the ERIC practical guidelines. Luc van Dyck from Euro-Argo ERIC narrates what the WP12 Team has done.
 
Could you kindly provide an overview of the work undertaken thus far to develop these recommendations?
 
We started off with experienced senior officers coming from various ERICs. Ensuring that the diversity of the ERIC landscape – in terms of cluster, size, structure and host country – is represented, was deemed essential for the success of the endeavour. We spoke about our respective issues and challenges regarding the implementation of the ERIC Regulation and about possible solutions. It wasn’t always easy – it is somewhat surprising to see how little we may be aware of and understand each other’s scope and operations – but we rapidly realized that despite our diversity, challenges related to the implementation of the ERIC Regulation are often common to many, if not most, ERICs. Then came the Commission’s offer to contribute to the revision of the European Commission’s (EC) practical guidelines for the implementation of ERIC. This somehow dictated the way our challenges and recommendations would be structured and presented: by reference to the articles of the regulation and the content of the existing guidelines. Writing the document was – and had to be, given the short deadline – quite rapid and straightforward. The next step was to collect comments and additions from ERIC Director Generals. Finally, the document was endorsed by the ERIC Forum Executive Board and could be presented to the Commission during the ERIC Forum meeting in Brussels in February this year. Some of us (i.e. Allen Weeks; Gabor Nemeth of ELI ERIC, Jana Pavlic-Zupanc of BBMRI ERIC and I) have been invited to participate, alongside external experts like Carlo Rizzuto, in the EC working group revising the guidelines. It was very rewarding to see that, during the first meeting of the WG, our paper really set the frame for the discussion. Personally, I greatly appreciate the fact that the Commission is genuinely listening to us.
 
What are the primary challenges, consequences, and barriers identified regarding the regulation’s implementation?
 
Our work was based on our collective, practical experience of running an ERIC. Retrospectively, it encouraged us to see that the issues and challenges we identified largely overlap with those described in the – excellent – EGERIC Report and EC Third Report on the application of the regulation. The specific edge of our paper is that it really aims to put the finger where it hurts and propose solutions. Broadly speaking, our challenges can be categorized as follows: (1) challenges with governance and organisational matters, (2) financial sustainability, (3) varying national laws and contexts that entail hurdles for the ERIC recognition, (4) the implementation of the VAT exemptions, (5) the limited and non-economic activities, (6) mobility and employment of highly skilled personnel, and (7) internationalisation. It should be noted that many of these challenges are addressed in other WPs of EF2, albeit from a different, more operational perspective.
 
Furthermore, based on these findings, could you highlight the key recommendations deemed most crucial?
 
The report is rather short and I would really encourage everyone to read it because all recommendations are important. What I would like to stress is that, as conceived, the ERIC Regulation provides a unique and wonderful framework for the creation of research infrastructures. It is not perfect, but it is truly a European success story. The problems don’t lie in the spirit of the regulation, but in the various interpretations that have been made of it and in the implementation at national level. In part, it can be traced back to the lack of clear, operation-based guidelines, especially in the early days. But I would also dare to say that, in many instances, our challenges may relate to a too-weak political commitment of some member states for the ERICs in which they participate. This can materialize in many different ways. At governance level, members may fail to exercise their due political oversight. At financial level, ERICs are chronically understaffed and under-resourced. Challenges related to the ERIC status in the host country, notably the fiscal status, or the operationalization of the VAT exemption deserve more attention and necessitate a sustained dialogue between different national administrations. All this is but a part of what we address in our paper.
 
Lastly, could you provide insight into the future trajectory of your group’s work?
 
WP12 extends over the first two reporting periods of EF2. There is still a lot of work to do because it is certainly possible to improve and complement our first report. Furthermore, we are committed to documenting the practical issues and challenges related to the implementation of the ERIC Regulation and the VAT exemption and to collecting examples of best practices and mitigation strategies deployed by ERICs. This material should be uploaded on the ERIC Forum web platform and, if possible, linked to the revised EC practical guidelines – this has been suggested by the Commission. It would constitute a precious resource both for existing ERICs and for ERICs-to be. On the other hand, our work will be dictated by the Commission’s agenda. We will, of course, continue to provide input for the revision of the practical guidelines.
 
The recommendations formulated through Work Package 12 of EF2 represent an important milestone in addressing the challenges faced by ERICs in implementing the ERIC Regulation. By heeding these recommendations and leveraging the insights garnered, policymakers can pave the way for a more conducive regulatory environment that fosters innovation and scientific excellence. The primary challenges identified, ranging from governance and financial sustainability to internationalization and VAT exemptions, underscore the complexity of managing research infrastructures under the current regulatory framework.
 
Moving forward, it is imperative that the recommendations are given due consideration by policymakers and stakeholders at both the national and European levels. By addressing the operational challenges faced by ERICs, policymakers can ensure that these vital research infrastructures continue to contribute to the advancement of science and innovation in Europe.